I'm designing a simple speaker stand. My question is: if the speaker will
sit on a kind of spring or rather if the whole stand is a slightly
springy-like, will this somehow affect the sound coming from the speaker
compared to if the speaker was on a heavy and solid object? This stand is
not necessarily for high-end use, but certainly hifi, or at least I hope so.
So should a speaker stand be very solid to prevent vibration of the stand.
The speaker's weight is about 6-8kg.

ps. If you know any nice looking short, about 40cm high speaker stands, I'd
be delighted to check it out.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
I'm designing a simple speaker stand. My question is: if the speaker will
sit on a kind of spring or rather if the whole stand is a slightly
springy-like, will this somehow affect the sound coming from the speaker
compared to if the speaker was on a heavy and solid object? This stand is
not necessarily for high-end use, but certainly hifi, or at least I hope
so. So should a speaker stand be very solid to prevent vibration of the
stand. The speaker's weight is about 6-8kg.

ps. If you know any nice looking short, about 40cm high speaker stands,
I'd be delighted to check it out.

Why would you want the stands to be springy at all? Assuming the
springiness si not enough to make teh speaker unstable, itshouldn't be a
problem.

Speaker stands do only one thing, they raise the speaker so the tweeter is
at ear level, thereby allowing one to hear the direct sound from them. They
do not have to be massive, sand filled or lead filled, they do not add
vibration and they do not have any other effect on the speakers.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
I'm designing a simple speaker stand. My question is: if the speaker will
sit on a kind of spring or rather if the whole stand is a slightly
springy-like, will this somehow affect the sound coming from the speaker
compared to if the speaker was on a heavy and solid object? This stand is
not necessarily for high-end use, but certainly hifi, or at least I hope
so. So should a speaker stand be very solid to prevent vibration of the
stand. The speaker's weight is about 6-8kg.

ps. If you know any nice looking short, about 40cm high speaker stands,
I'd be delighted to check it out.
Do not put the speakers on springs. Speaker cabinets are not inert. They
vibrate. In the case of a strong resonance, the level of sound emitted by
the cabinet approaches that emitted by the driver. A good support system is
not springy.

Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it should
convert vibration into heat quickly. However, I am unaware of any commercial
speaker stands that attempt anything more than complete rigidity.

But certainly do not go for springs! Don't try to bounce that idea around

wrote in message
. net...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message

Please ignore "nyob". He is rao's village idiot, a complete incompetent.

Regards,
Bob Morein

Robert Morein said:

Please ignore "nyob". He is rao's village idiot, a complete incompetent.

Unless you have a bug problem, in which case calling in Mickey is an act of
charity.

Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Ok! Thanks for your answer. I'm actually thinking about just having this
maybe 0.6-0.9cm thick metal strip, folded at top and bottom, forming
something like letter E without the middle line. So it's not a spring, but
perhaps more springy than average stands. Any comments about this idea?
Naturally I have to make sure that it doesn't break or twist (or at least
try to make sure)..

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Ok! Thanks for your answer. I'm actually thinking about just having this
maybe 0.6-0.9cm thick metal strip, folded at top and bottom, forming
something like letter E without the middle line. So it's not a spring, but
perhaps more springy than average stands. Any comments about this idea?
Naturally I have to make sure that it doesn't break or twist (or at least
try to make sure)..
Bad idea. An ideal stand would be made of a non bouncy material. To wit: a
superball is made of a very low loss rubber, so the ball bounces for a long
time. Silly putty, or clay, when thrown at a surface, barely rebounds. IOW,
the kinetic energy of the moving blob of putty is converted quickly into
heat.

There is a material sold for attaching speakers to stands in a temporary
fashion. The trade name is "blue tack", which appears to be a form of butyl
rubber, possibly combined with a clay filler. This material is plastic, but
not bouncy.

There are a number of nutty beliefs among high enders regarding the proper
way to support/suspend components, centered around the use of pointy cones.
But what is actually needed is much less romantic. The desired support
system acts as an absorptive damper for transfer of mechanical energy from
the speaker cabinet.

Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either, because a
perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.

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


Robert Morein said:

Please ignore "nyob". He is rao's village idiot, a complete incompetent.

Unless you have a bug problem, in which case calling in Mickey is an act
of
charity.

Can Mikey fix buggy computers?

Robert Morein said:

Please ignore "nyob". He is rao's village idiot, a complete incompetent.

Unless you have a bug problem, in which case calling in Mickey is an act
of charity.

Can Mikey fix buggy computers?

Mikey has a baseball bat. That's his only tool. Whether it works in his
clumsy paws is a subjective matter. :-)

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense. Naturally, you want a stand
that can support the speaker weight and that isn't likely to tip over.
Beyond elevating the speaker to ear level there is nothing else significant
about speaker stands. I would suggest you ask the same question over on
rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem and see what
kind of response you get.



Ok! Thanks for your answer. I'm actually thinking about just having this
maybe 0.6-0.9cm thick metal strip, folded at top and bottom, forming
something like letter E without the middle line. So it's not a spring, but
perhaps more springy than average stands. Any comments about this idea?
Naturally I have to make sure that it doesn't break or twist (or at least
try to make sure)..

Make the stand with a base that is just slightly smaller than the bottom of
the speaker. You can use wood or I've seen some DIY stands made form
plastic pipe filled with sand for stability.

wrote in message
. net...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

Kalle,
I was a Ph.D candidate in theoretical physics. Mikey is a tradesman who
is into the physics of beer. I suggest you ignore him.

Regards,
Bob Morein

Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either,
because a perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.

Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect the
sound somehow, then how does it affect? Maybe slightly dampen some of the
lower frequencies? Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act as a comb
filter? Could it even possibly reduce transient playback?

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I build
this stand and then test it out?

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either,
because a perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.

Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect the
sound somehow, then how does it affect? Maybe slightly dampen some of the
lower frequencies?

It won't dampen anything. It will simply allow the cabinet to ring like a
bell. Do you want your speaker to be a carillion?

Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act as a comb
filter? Could it even possibly reduce transient playback?

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I build
this stand and then test it out?
Steel is not a good absorber. Commercial steel stands are frequently
designed to be packed with sand, because the sand takes it from the steel.

There are two areas that audiophiles sometimes notice. In the midrange, the
speaker cabinet can radiate as much sound as the midrange, at a particularly
strong resonance. You may be able to hear this as an extra unwanted tone. It
is sometimes also felt that the bass is compromised. The listener may feel
that the bass is too strong, or "one note", due to the radiation from the
cabinet.

Do you perhaps have an opportunity to make the top of the stand a pan that
could hold:

1. concrete?
2. clay and gravel?

You can lay on top of the composite another sheet of steel, with slight
spacing, so it would not detract too much.

There are many sophisticated materials specifically for damping vibrations.
Typically, these are layered: sandwiches of wood and lead, gypsum sheet,
etc. But the simple solution is to use steel in boxes and tubes, because
this is inherently rigid, and attach the speakers to the stands using a
material such as Blue-Tack.

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:10:18 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Speaker cabinets are not inert. They
vibrate. In the case of a strong resonance, the level of sound emitted by
the cabinet approaches that emitted by the driver.

Wow! Now that's resonant!

At last, a speaker system to give us that true concert hall sound. :-)

Kalle Heinänen a écrit :
Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either,
because a perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.


Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect the
sound somehow, then how does it affect? Maybe slightly dampen some of the
lower frequencies? Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act as a comb
filter? Could it even possibly reduce transient playback?

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I build
this stand and then test it out?

Pipes full of sand are OK.
You can link 2 MDF baseplates with one (why not 2 or 3 of different
diameter ?)

Material ? PVC, copper, PE...

Wish you some fun.

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Kalle Heinänen a écrit :
Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either,
because a perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.


Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect the
sound somehow, then how does it affect? Maybe slightly dampen some of the
lower frequencies? Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act as a
comb filter? Could it even possibly reduce transient playback?

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I
build this stand and then test it out?

Pipes full of sand are OK.
You can link 2 MDF baseplates with one (why not 2 or 3 of different
diameter ?)

He wants aethetics.
Lionel, you are French, surely you must understand

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:10:18 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Speaker cabinets are not inert. They
vibrate. In the case of a strong resonance, the level of sound emitted by
the cabinet approaches that emitted by the driver.

Wow! Now that's resonant!

At last, a speaker system to give us that true concert hall sound. :-)

There are several speaker manufacturers who actually claim that, but
mainstream thought appears to be that woody sounds should come from the
instruments, not the speakers.

Ok I was experimenting with my speaker on a rigid stand, speaker in air and
speaker on a pillow. The speaker was a Genelec 1030. Observations:

1. In this room, the vibration felt with the whole body changes
dramatically. It's not obvious whether vibration felt with body would be
good or bad, but in a way the vibration does a bit emphasize the transients
(from bass to mid) and in that way it is nice - but not necessary by any
means.

2. The position of the speaker, position of head and angle of head greatly
changes the sound.

3. The sound did not change between rigid stand, speaker in air and speaker
on a pillow. At least not nearly as much as the effect of points 1 and 2.

The metal design may have its own quirks though.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Ok I was experimenting with my speaker on a rigid stand, speaker in air
and speaker on a pillow. The speaker was a Genelec 1030. Observations:

1. In this room, the vibration felt with the whole body changes
dramatically. It's not obvious whether vibration felt with body would be
good or bad, but in a way the vibration does a bit emphasize the
transients (from bass to mid) and in that way it is nice - but not
necessary by any means.

2. The position of the speaker, position of head and angle of head greatly
changes the sound.

3. The sound did not change between rigid stand, speaker in air and
speaker on a pillow. At least not nearly as much as the effect of points 1
and 2.

The metal design may have its own quirks though.
I think your observations are reasonable. But there is a interesting
characteristic of perception: the longer you listen, the deeper you dig. So
it may become apparent to you at some point that there is an audible cabinet
resonance. Cabinets do have the ability to damp by themselves -- ie.,
dissipate vibrations into heat. Some are better than others. Although it's
best to help them out by coupling them to dissipative surfaces, you may do
just fine.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Ok I was experimenting with my speaker on a rigid stand, speaker in air
and speaker on a pillow. The speaker was a Genelec 1030. Observations:

1. In this room, the vibration felt with the whole body changes
dramatically. It's not obvious whether vibration felt with body would be
good or bad, but in a way the vibration does a bit emphasize the
transients (from bass to mid) and in that way it is nice - but not
necessary by any means.

2. The position of the speaker, position of head and angle of head greatly
changes the sound.

As is the case for speakers that have pinpoint imaging. Myown speakers are
the same way, I can always hear if my wife has moved on or both, because the
sondstage completely collapses.

3. The sound did not change between rigid stand, speaker in air and
speaker on a pillow. At least not nearly as much as the effect of points 1
and 2.

As I stated earlier,speaker stands do not contribute any audible vibration
and the material of the stands need only be whatever you consider
sufficiednt to do the job and be in line with your personal sense of
aesthetics.

The metal design may have its own quirks though.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:10:18 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Speaker cabinets are not inert. They
vibrate. In the case of a strong resonance, the level of sound emitted by
the cabinet approaches that emitted by the driver.

Wow! Now that's resonant!

At last, a speaker system to give us that true concert hall sound. :-)

He's right they do vibrate but if they do it audibly they are crap speakers,
unless as is the case in some rather odd speaker designs, the vibration is
undamped purposely so as to contribute to the sound.

I doubt very much if there is a speaker that is of any decent quality and
normal design, that has a cabinet that emanates sound loud enough to come
close to the sound from the drivers.

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:43:36 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


wrote in message
.net...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

Kalle,
I was a Ph.D candidate in theoretical physics.

How did it go?



Mikey is a tradesman who
is into the physics of beer. I suggest you ignore him.

Regards,
Bob Morein

Robert Morein wrote:
wrote in message
. net...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

Kalle,
I was a Ph.D candidate

Candidate.... or reject? Why don't you tell him what the courts
decided.

Bob Morein, Ph.D Reject.... with the court papers to prove it.

ScottW

wrote

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

What???

When resonant is dissipated where do
you think it goes?


Naturally, you want a stand that can support the speaker weight and that
isn't likely to tip over.
Agreed.

Beyond elevating the speaker to ear level there is nothing else
significant about speaker stands.
Hehehe... oh-right!


I would suggest you ask the same question
over on rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem
and see what kind of response you get.

So your basis of knowledge on the subject
is what others tell you? How about doing
the work yourself, mr. Arm-chair
Commander?

"Robert Morein" wrote

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I
build this stand and then test it out?

Steel is not a good absorber.
Well, yes and no. Light steel (speaker stands)
are compliant with many frequencies (good
thing) but poor in capasity to attenuating energy
without help.


Commercial steel stands are frequently designed to be packed with sand,
because the sand takes it from the steel.

Sand and lead/steel shot are even better
for this. Sand, rubber and shot will produce
even different results. Much depends on the
resonating frequencies of the speaker
cabinet and therefore the choosing the best
conglomerate/mixture to use.


There are two areas that audiophiles sometimes notice. In the midrange,
the speaker cabinet can radiate as much sound as the midrange, at a
particularly strong resonance.
Bass performance to can be improved by
reducing the tubbiness.


There are many sophisticated materials specifically for damping
vibrations. Typically, these are layered: sandwiches of wood and lead,
gypsum sheet, etc. But the simple solution is to use steel in boxes and
tubes, because this is inherently rigid, and attach the speakers to the
stands using a material such as Blue-Tack.

Agreed, Bostik Blu-tack is very good. It
should be noted that where the blu-tack is
placed on the speaker is important, too.
Certain areas of the speaker's bottom/base
plate are more active (resonate activite)
than others. Also, a thin layer of blu-tack
is much more effective in transmitting
resonance than a blob.

Speaker points can also be effective on
the speaker’s base plate. Points or
Blu-tack, will each have different frequency
compliancy.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote

Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect the
sound somehow, then how does it affect?
Depending on what frequencies the speaker
and speaker stands are compliant in, the
loudness will drop/attenuate.


Maybe slightly dampen some of the lower frequencies?
You will see multiple frequencies being
effected, if effective. Mid to upper bass
and midrange are the easiest to control.


Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act as a comb filter? Could it
even possibly reduce transient playback?

Please define what you mean by "transient
playback?"


Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I build
this stand and then test it out?
IME, because multiple frequencies are
involved testing should be done using single
or wobble frequency test bands, as opposed
to Pink or White noise. Stereophile has one
for $10 or you can use a computer to burn a
CD with them on it.

By recording and then comparing the sound
pressure differences of the speakers on or
off the stand you should see an
accumulative/significant overall dB output
drop from the speakers. Comparing two
speakers one on the stand an one off you
should notice a sound balance/loudness
difference.

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
I'm designing a simple speaker stand. My question is: if the speaker will
sit on a kind of spring or rather if the whole stand is a slightly
springy-like, will this somehow affect the sound coming from the speaker
compared to if the speaker was on a heavy and solid object? This stand is
not necessarily for high-end use, but certainly hifi, or at least I hope
so. So should a speaker stand be very solid to prevent vibration of the
stand. The speaker's weight is about 6-8kg.

ps. If you know any nice looking short, about 40cm high speaker stands,
I'd be delighted to check it out.


Check out:
http://www.ikea.com/webapp/wcs/store...roductId=11140

Your speakers are likely to sound better on this than anything you can build
even near the prize. Just out of curiosity, what kind of speakers will be
"hifi" at 6-8 kilos a piece? My experience tells me that at that weight the
box will typically compromise the sound to a significant degree. But then
again, I haven't heard them all.

Cheers,

Margaret

wrote

He's right they do vibrate but if they do it audibly
they are crap speakers, unless as is the case in
some rather odd speaker designs, the vibration is
undamped purposely so as to contribute to the
sound.

Please site one manufacture who designs
for this "undamped purposely so as to
contribute to the sound?"

Quack, quack, quack...

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:43:36 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


wrote in message
k.net...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
Physics tells us that the speaker stand should not be perfectly rigid
either; it should be mildly deformable, with very high "loss", ie, it
should convert vibration into heat quickly.

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

Kalle,
I was a Ph.D candidate in theoretical physics.

How did it go?

I learned things I have treasured my entire life.
You have tasted as well?

"Powell" wrote in message
...

wrote

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

What???

When resonant is dissipated where do
you think it goes?


Naturally, you want a stand that can support the speaker weight and that
isn't likely to tip over.
Agreed.

Beyond elevating the speaker to ear level there is nothing else
significant about speaker stands.
Hehehe... oh-right!


I would suggest you ask the same question
over on rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem
and see what kind of response you get.

So your basis of knowledge on the subject
is what others tell you? How about doing
the work yourself, mr. Arm-chair
Commander?

You have my permission to degrade this idiot.
IMHO, Mikey holds down last place in IQ, and first place in disinformation.

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Kalle Heinänen" wrote in message
...
I'm designing a simple speaker stand. My question is: if the speaker will
sit on a kind of spring or rather if the whole stand is a slightly
springy-like, will this somehow affect the sound coming from the speaker
compared to if the speaker was on a heavy and solid object? This stand is
not necessarily for high-end use, but certainly hifi, or at least I hope
so. So should a speaker stand be very solid to prevent vibration of the
stand. The speaker's weight is about 6-8kg.

ps. If you know any nice looking short, about 40cm high speaker stands,
I'd be delighted to check it out.


Check out:
http://www.ikea.com/webapp/wcs/store...roductId=11140

But they take up a lot more space than the speakers.

How about pieces of a large timber, cut short, and plasticized. Possibly
funky & functional?

In article , "ScottW"
wrote:

Candidate.... or reject? Why don't you tell him what the courts
decided.

Bob Morein, Ph.D Reject.... with the court papers to prove it.


Sad but so true, Scott.

Think about it. . . My one and only son has lived in the same room, in the
same house, in MY house, since the early 1950's. He's never had a job.
NEVER. He always impressed everyone as a "smart guy", although I know now
he's just a bull**** artist. SURE he's "smart" - he went to college for
almost 20 years on my dime!

His last attempt at a "career", filmmaker, has turned into another pathetic
failure. He purchased cameras, sound equipment, lights, and other
bric-a-brac and waltzed around with a loupe around his neck. Result? The
equipment's now collecting dust in the basement.

FAILURE.

Then he had a brainstorm about solar energy? Spent weeks pounding on
expensive metals in the basement? Result?

FAILURE!

He also claimed to be working on a high-power industrial pump. Result?

FAILURE!

$100,000 to the first person that can get this 53 year old into a job, any
job, and out of my house.

Sylvan Morein, DDS



PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein
--

Robert Morein History
--
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/l...ws/4853918.htm

Doctoral student takes intellectual property case to Supreme Court
By L. STUART DITZEN
Philadelphia Inquirer

PHILADELPHIA -Even the professors who dismissed him from a doctoral program
at Drexel University agreed that Robert Morein was uncommonly smart.

They apparently didn't realize that he was uncommonly stubborn too - so much
so that he would mount a court fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court
to challenge his dismissal.

The Supremes have already rejected this appeal, btw.

"It's a personality trait I have - I'm a tenacious guy," said Morein, a
pleasantly eccentric man regarded by friends as an inventive genius. "And we
do come to a larger issue here."

An "inventive genius" that has never invented anything. And hardly
"pleasantly" eccentric.

A five-year legal battle between this unusual ex-student and one of
Philadelphia's premier educational institutions has gone largely unnoticed
by the media and the public.

Because no one gives a **** about a 50 year old loser.

But it has been the subject of much attention in academia.

Drexel says it dismissed Morein in 1995 because he failed, after eight
years, to complete a thesis required for a doctorate in electrical and
computer engineering.

Not to mention the 12 years it took him to get thru high school!
BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Morein, 50, of Dresher, Pa., contends that he was dismissed only after his
thesis adviser "appropriated" an innovative idea Morein had developed in a
rarefied area of thought called "estimation theory" and arranged to have it
patented.

A contention rejected by three courts. From a 50 YEAR OLD that has
done NOTHING PRODUCTIVE with his life.

In February 2000, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Esther R. Sylvester
ruled that Morein's adviser indeed had taken his idea.

An idea that was worth nothing, because it didn't work. Just like
Robert Morein, who has never worked a day in his life.

Sylvester held that Morein had been unjustly dismissed and she ordered
Drexel to reinstate him or refund his tuition.

Funnily enough, Drexel AGREED to reinstate Morein, who rejected the
offer because he knew he was and IS a failed loser. Spending daddy's
money to cover up his lack of productivity.

That brought roars of protest from the lions of academia. There is a long
tradition in America of noninterference by the courts in academic decisions.

Backed by every major university in Pennsylvania and organizations
representing thousands of others around the country, Drexel appealed to the
state Superior Court.

The appellate court, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Sylvester in June 2001 and
restored the status quo. Morein was, once again, out at Drexel. And the
time-honored axiom that courts ought to keep their noses out of academic
affairs was reasserted.

The state Supreme Court declined to review the case and, in an ordinary
litigation, that would have been the end of it.

But Morein, in a quixotic gesture that goes steeply against the odds, has
asked the highest court in the land to give him a hearing.

Daddy throws more money down the crapper.

His attorney, Faye Riva Cohen, said the Supreme Court appeal is important
even if it fails because it raises the issue of whether a university has a
right to lay claim to a student's ideas - or intellectual property - without
compensation.

"Any time you are in a Ph.D. program, you are a serf, you are a slave," said
Cohen. Morein "is concerned not only for himself. He feels that what
happened to him is pretty common."

It's called HIGHER EDUCATION, honey. The students aren't in charge,
the UNIVERSITY and PROFESSORS are.

Drexel's attorney, Neil J. Hamburg, called Morein's appeal - and his claim
that his idea was stolen - "preposterous."

"I will eat my shoe if the Supreme Court hears this case," declared Hamburg.
"We're not even going to file a response. He is a brilliant guy, but his
intelligence should be used for the advancement of society rather than
pursuing self-destructive litigation."

No **** sherlock.

The litigation began in 1997, when Morein sued Drexel claiming that a
committee of professors had dumped him after he accused his faculty adviser,
Paul Kalata, of appropriating his idea.

His concept was considered to have potential value for businesses in
minutely measuring the internal functions of machines, industrial processes
and electronic systems.

The field of "estimation theory" is one in which scientists attempt to
calculate what they cannot plainly observe, such as the inside workings of a
nuclear plant or a computer.

My estimation theory? There is NO brain at work inside the head of
Robert Morein, only sawdust.


Prior to Morein's dismissal, Drexel looked into his complaint against Kalata
and concluded that the associate professor had done nothing wrong. Kalata,
through a university lawyer, declined to comment.

At a nonjury trial before Sylvester in 1999, Morein testified that Kalata in
1990 had posed a technical problem for him to study for his thesis. It
related to estimation theory.

Kalata, who did not appear at the trial, said in a 1998 deposition that a
Cherry Hill company for which he was a paid consultant, K-Tron
International, had asked him to develop an alternate estimation method for
it. The company manufactures bulk material feeders and conveyors used in
industrial processes.

Morein testified that, after much study, he experienced "a flash of
inspiration" and came up with a novel mathematical concept to address the
problem Kalata had presented.

Without his knowledge, Morein said, Kalata shared the idea with K-Tron.

K-Tron then applied for a patent, listing Kalata and Morein as co-inventors.

Morein said he agreed "under duress" to the arrangement, but felt "locked
into a highly disadvantageous situation." As a result, he testified, he
became alienated from Kalata.

As events unfolded, Kalata signed over his interest in the patent to K-Tron.
The company never capitalized on the technology and eventually allowed the
patent to lapse. No one made any money from it.

Because it was bogus. Even Kalata was mortified that he was a victim
of this SCAMSTER, Robert Morein.

In 1991, Morein went to the head of Drexel's electrical engineering
department, accused Kalata of appropriating his intellectual property, and
asked for a new faculty adviser.

The staff at Drexel laughed wildly at the ignorance of Robert Morein.

He didn't get one. Instead, a committee of four professors, including
Kalata, was formed to oversee Morein's thesis work.

Four years later, the committee dismissed him, saying he had failed to
complete his thesis.

So Morein ****s up his first couple years, gets new faculty advisers
(a TEAM), and then ****s up again! Brilliant!

Morein claimed that the committee intentionally had undermined him.

Morein makes LOTS of claims that are nonsense. One look thru the
usenet proves it.

Judge Sylvester agreed. In her ruling, Sylvester wrote: "It is this court's
opinion that the defendants were motivated by bad faith and ill will."

So much for political machine judges.

The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 appeals a year and agrees to hear only
about 100 of them.

Hamburg, Drexel's attorney, is betting the high court will reject Morein's
appeal out of hand because its focal point - concerning a student's right to
intellectual property - was not central to the litigation in the
Pennsylvania courts.

Morein said he understands it's a long shot, but he feels he must pursue it.

Failure. Look it up in Websters. You'll see a picture of Robert
Morein. The poster boy for SCAMMING LOSERS.

"I had to seek closure," he said.

Without a doctorate, he said, he has been unable to pursue a career he had
hoped would lead him into research on artificial intelligence.

Who better to tell us about "artificial intelligence".
BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


As it is, Morein lives at home with his father and makes a modest income
from stock investments. He has written a film script that he is trying to
make into a movie. And in the basement of his father's home he is working on
an invention, an industrial pump so powerful it could cut steel with a
bulletlike stream of water.


FAILED STUDENT
FAILED MOVIE MAKER
FAILED SCREENWRITER
FAILED INVESTOR
FAILED DRIVER
FAILED SON
FAILED PARENTS
FAILED INVENTOR
FAILED PLAINTIFF
FAILED HOMOSEXUAL
FAILED HUMAN
FAILED
FAILED

In , Robert Morein wrote :


"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Kalle Heinänen a écrit :
Ironically, a perfectly rigid stand won't work at this either,
because a perfectly rigid stand is incapable of receiving energy.


Do you have an educated guess - if my twisted metal stand will affect
the sound somehow, then how does it affect? Maybe slightly dampen some
of the lower frequencies? Maybe the twisted piece of metal can even act
as a comb filter? Could it even possibly reduce transient playback?

Any ideas what kind of music or test signals I should listen to if I
build this stand and then test it out?

Pipes full of sand are OK.
You can link 2 MDF baseplates with one (why not 2 or 3 of different
diameter ?)

He wants aethetics.
Lionel, you are French, surely you must understand

Basic material available.
Skill and imagination requested.

BTW a lot of people have major problems (pratic and metaphysic) with the
speaker stands and they often forget that it is very easy to hang some
bookshelf speakers.


--
"Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?"

Dave Weil, Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15

"Robert Morein" wrote

I would suggest you ask the same question
over on rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem
and see what kind of response you get.

So your basis of knowledge on the subject
is what others tell you? How about doing
the work yourself, mr. Arm-chair
Commander?

You have my permission to degrade this idiot.
IMHO, Mikey holds down last place in IQ, and first place in
disinformation.

Perhaps I can put this in metaphor you might
understand, you pick, Robert

A. Pot calls kettle black.

B. As the French philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre said (English) "hell is other people"
or literally (French) "hell is the others."

C. The little head drives the big head.

D. You hate because it’s easy for you to
do so... it’s an illusion of ego.

"Powell" wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote

I would suggest you ask the same question
over on rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem
and see what kind of response you get.

So your basis of knowledge on the subject
is what others tell you? How about doing
the work yourself, mr. Arm-chair
Commander?

You have my permission to degrade this idiot.
IMHO, Mikey holds down last place in IQ, and first place in
disinformation.

Perhaps I can put this in metaphor you might
understand, you pick, Robert

A. Pot calls kettle black.

B. As the French philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre said (English) "hell is other people"
or literally (French) "hell is the others."

C. The little head drives the big head.

D. You hate because it's easy for you to
do so... it's an illusion of ego.

Use any technique you desire.

"Powell" wrote in message
...

wrote

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker stands do not convert
vibration into heat at all. This is nonsense.

What???

When resonant is dissipated where do
you think it goes?

Resonance from where? From the speakers? Any vibration from the speaker
cabinets is going to be so small as to be unworthy of mentioning. Any
vibrations would most certainly be absorbed by the room much more than the
stands.


Naturally, you want a stand that can support the speaker weight and that
isn't likely to tip over.
Agreed.

Beyond elevating the speaker to ear level there is nothing else
significant about speaker stands.
Hehehe... oh-right!

Name the other things they do that are significant.

I would suggest you ask the same question
over on rec.audio.tech and mention the alleged vibratin to heat problem
and see what kind of response you get.

So your basis of knowledge on the subject
is what others tell you? How about doing
the work yourself, mr. Arm-chair
Commander?

wrote

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker
stands do not convert vibration into heat at all.
This is nonsense.

What???

When resonant is dissipated where do
you think it goes?

Resonance from where? From the speakers?
Any vibration from the speaker cabinets is going
to be so small as to be unworthy of mentioning.

You’re contradicting yourself. You have
already theorized that manufactures
design for this "undamped purposely so as
to contribute to the sound" Now you claim
speaker cabinets resonance "is so small
as to be unworthy of mentioning" Which
is it?


Any vibrations would most certainly be
absorbed by the room much more than
the stands.

"most certainly"... based on your
understanding of wave propagation, I'm
sure you think so.


Beyond elevating the speaker to ear
level there is nothing else
significant about speaker stands.

Hehehe... oh-right!

Name the other things they do that are
significant.

So that I won’t talk over your head, please
describe what, if any, actual experiences
you have using, measuring or auditioning
speaker stands? OTOH, It's ok if you
want to run away again, I understand

"Robert Morein" wrote

You have my permission to degrade this idiot.
IMHO, Mikey holds down last place in IQ, and
first place in disinformation.

Perhaps I can put this in metaphor you might
understand, you pick, Robert

A. Pot calls kettle black.

B. As the French philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre said (English) "hell is other people"
or literally (French) "hell is the others."

C. The little head drives the big head.

D. You hate because it's easy for you to
do so... it's an illusion of ego.

Use any technique you desire.

Now that's just sad. For your edification a
metaphor is not a “technique.”

met-a-phor (met'uh fôr , -fuhr) n.
1. the application of a word or phrase to an
object or concept it does not literally
denote, suggesting comparison to that
object or concept, as in " A mighty
fortress is our God. ".

In article , says...

wrote

He's right they do vibrate but if they do it audibly
they are crap speakers, unless as is the case in
some rather odd speaker designs, the vibration is
undamped purposely so as to contribute to the
sound.

Please site one manufacture who designs
for this "undamped purposely so as to
contribute to the sound?"

Well, this might be the kind of thing he's talking about.
http://www.audionote.co.uk/ describing the AN-K:

"The AN-K cabinet is made from materials that compliment the workings of
the chosen drive units, where we, instead of trying to damp the
resonances in the cabinet, place them in frequency bands where they aid
and enhance the drive unit's work."

You're welcome.

--
Bill

"Powell" wrote in message
...

wrote

Physics tells us nothing of the kind. Speaker
stands do not convert vibration into heat at all.
This is nonsense.

What???

When resonant is dissipated where do
you think it goes?

Resonance from where? From the speakers?
Any vibration from the speaker cabinets is going
to be so small as to be unworthy of mentioning.

You're contradicting yourself. You have
already theorized that manufactures
design for this "undamped purposely so as
to contribute to the sound"

Reread what I said. I said a few oddball designs had used that sort of
effect.

Now you claim
speaker cabinets resonance "is so small
as to be unworthy of mentioning" Which
is it?


It would depend on the design, most people have the good sense not to use
the cabinet to contribute sound of it's own.

Any vibrations would most certainly be
absorbed by the room much more than
the stands.

"most certainly"... based on your
understanding of wave propagation, I'm
sure you think so.


Beyond elevating the speaker to ear
level there is nothing else
significant about speaker stands.

Hehehe... oh-right!

Name the other things they do that are
significant.

So that I won't talk over your head, please
describe what, if any, actual experiences
you have using, measuring or auditioning
speaker stands? OTOH, It's ok if you
want to run away again, I understand


I have none since I have no knowledge that such is ever required.
If you hav such knowledge and measurements please allow me to benefit from
you experience.