| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ferstler on Soundstaging
I wrote about soundstaging and imaging in a column once for
The Sensible Sound and also posted an excerpt from that column in response to a comment about soundstaging in another thread. Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: To make my evaluations [regarding imaging and soundstaging], I used both musical source material and a series of fixed-image, pink-noise panning signals available on the Delos "Surround Spectacular" test disc set, DE-3179. This is a two-disc set with stereo and matrixed surround test signals on one of them and musical excerpts recorded by John Eargle on the other. The test sequences were engineered by David Ranada. There are actually two versions of this test on the disc, with one being configured for checking out the center steering with Dolby matrixed program material and the other configured for checking out the soundstage spread, smoothness, and imaging with conventional two-channel recordings. The balance for each is somewhat different, but each test offers a sequence of white- and pink-noise signals at five locations: HARD-LEFT, HALF-LEFT, CENTER, HALF-RIGHT, and HARD-RIGHT. They do this continuously back and forth across the soundstage. They also offer continuous, smooth sweeps in addition to a five-position sequence. The two-channel, conventional-stereo version is what we are interested in here, since that will be the most relevant to what we get when playing regular two-channel recordings. With standard, two-speaker stereo playback the levels at each of those five positions, even at half-left and half-right, should be at about the same levels - provided the listener occupies the sweet spot. The noise bursts at each location should also be well focussed, with them being uniformly strong at each of the five positions: strong / strong / strong / strong / strong. You should also experience this uniformity with good musical program material. Unfortunately, if the listener moves some distance away from sweet-spot listening position, the smoothness of the transitions go somewhat to pot, with the sound shifting unevenly toward the closer main speaker. For example, if I move a modest distance to the right of center, the staging effect will came across as strong / very weak / weak / strong / very strong. This same kind of two-speaker soundstage skewing can also be heard with most musical source material, although it will not usually be as emphatic as it is with those test-tone noise bursts. Some speakers are designed to counteract this tendencies (the dbx Soundfield One system of a number of years ago comes to mind), and it can also be counteracted somewhat by toeing conventional speakers inward. For my evaluation of the Dolby Pro Logic II (music) and DTS Neo:6 (music) steering systems with two-channel music source material I primarily used two speaker/processor combinations. These were my own Allison IC-20 main speakers and a custom center speaker (plus Allison and RDL surrounds), controlled by the Yamaha RX-Z1 receiver, and then a bit later on three NHT M6 satellites and Hsu VTF-3 subwoofer (with additional NHT and RDL speakers as surrounds). The latter combination was controlled by the Sunfire Theater Grand III processor/tuner, with three Sherbourn 1/300MB monoblocks powering the front satellite speakers and an assortment of other, smaller amps powering the surrounds. Utilizing the center channel with either Yamaha Classical/Opera or standard Dolby Pro Logic processing (and even with the movie/cinema versions of DPL II and Neo:6), the balance at the sweet-spot listening position with this series of noise burst test signals was always: strong / weak / strong / weak / strong. In addition to being subdued in level, the half-left and half-right images were often vague in terms of stability and focus, with only hard-right, center, and hard-left sounds firmly stabilized and strong. I found that if the Yamaha's front-enhancement "effect" channels were turned on the Classical/Opera mode added a somewhat spacious characteristic up front. However, the soundstage imaging focus remained unchanged. When listening from off axis, things got somewhat better. For example, if I sidled toward the right a couple of feet the spread was always: strong / weak / strong / strong / strong. The center steering stabilized the imaging much more effectively than what I got with only two channels. Unfortunately, when listening from the sweet spot with a lot of complex musical material the soundstage often will partially collapse towards the center, and sometimes the collapse will be rather dramatic. The steering systems often do this with musical sources, even though they may not do it with test signals. Consequently, to make both old-style DPL and Classical/Opera steering work effectively up front it is nearly always a good idea to back the center level off about 3 dB below the normal Dolby set-up level. I have been doing this as a matter of policy when checking out recordings in my record-review column, and it works quite well. Of course, with the Delos disc's noise-sequence test, the sweet-spot imaging will then show up as: strong / weak / weak / weak / strong. Fortunately, this far-left and far-right weighting does not cause problems with most music material. Indeed, in nearly all cases the soundstage is improved dramatically, with a smooth left-right blend, particularly when listening from off axis. At such locations, the image remains nearly as stable as what we have with the center set at the Dolby calibration level. However, both DPL II (Music) and Neo:6 (Music) are in a position to be superior to some of those other modes when it comes to soundstage focus, spread, and stability. In addition, with the Surround Spectacular test sequence, the same results are obtained from the sweet spot as when using two speakers: strong / strong / strong / strong / strong. There was no lack of focus or image shifting at all with the Allison/Yamaha combination, nor did I detect any with the NHT/Sunfire combination. Musical signals are equally well stabilized and spread out. Now, to get these results with DPL II (Music), it is necessary to work with an adjustment parameter called "center width." At the lowest setting, the steering is similar to what we have with both standard DPL and DPL II (Movie) and also with the Yamaha steering modes. At the highest number, the center speaker is bypassed and you have a phantom center. However, at an in-between setting the steered center is solidly blended with the phantom, and you get a mix that stabilizes the center, while at the same time offering up stabilized half-left and half-right images, too. I got the best results with the Dolby center width set at number 3. Neo:6 (Music) cannot be adjusted as to center width, but as best I can tell it has a fixed setting that is similar to that one. When listening from off axis with the lowest setting of DPL II (Music) or the setting is adjusted for a modest phantom/center blend, the results are easily as good as what we get with the other steered modes, and similar results are obtained with Neo:6 (Music). If we shift the listening location to the right again we get: strong / weak / strong / strong / strong. With music, the slight weakness at the half-left location is nearly always inconsequential. While it is debatable whether these new DPL II and Neo:6 music technologies are always superior in terms of soundstaging to what Yamaha offers with their Classical/Opera mode (with the center level reduced 3 dB to minimize center collapse), it is likely that with some musical sources they will be. I now use all three, and have decided to optimize the DPL II center-width setting at number 2, with Neo:6 being the alternate if I want a still more blended soundstage. It is not necessary to back off the center level at all with those functions selected. If I want a more lively hall acoustic, I generally opt for the Yamaha Classical/Opera mode. These new music-oriented Dolby and DTS technologies are also remarkable when it comes to what they can do with the surround ambiance they extract from a recording. With the ambiance clicks on the Surround Spectacular disc, DPL II (Music) generated an almost out-of-phase characteristic from the surround channels. It was unlike anything else I have heard using those test-signal clicks. The effect is almost mysterious and when musical signals were played, the result added an uncanny three-dimensionality to the sense of large-room space in my home-listening room. The result was particularly effective with my IC-20 main speakers, because they generate a lot of side-wall reflections anyway, and those blended seamlessly with the DPL II (Music) ambiance further back into the room. Unlike with the front soundstage, where the two technologies are fairly similar, with the surround channels Neo:6 (Music) was somewhat different from DPL II (Music). The surround ambiance had a wide feel to it, but it was more coherent and less diffuse sounding. As with the movie version, Neo:6 (Music) also makes use of the center-rear channel (if you have it hooked up), and that feed was probably responsible for the somewhat less diffuse sound from the surrounds. By now, you are probably aware that Neo:6 technology involves simulating six channels from a two-channel input. With music, I felt that the sense of space with DPL II (Music) was a bit superior to what I detected with Neo:6. However, much will depend on the source material, the size and shape of the room, the speaker arrangement, and the listening position. From off axis, Neo:6 might have been a bit more stable in terms of soundfield consistency, but it was really hard to judge, even with the ambiance clicks. Of course, Yamaha is noted for its soundfield enhancements, and in this case the Dolby and DTS music-mode advantages were anything but cut and dry. In most cases, the Yamaha processing came across as a bit superior, particularly with some of its concert-hall and jazz-club modes, but also with the Classical/Opera function. DPL II and Neo:6 lack the flexibility of the Yamaha hall-ambiance palette. To a lesser extent, the same goes for the Sunfire TG III, which has a user-adjustable Jazz mode that incorporates center steering and exhibits a remarkable ability to simulate a number of different-sized listening spaces, including a concert hall. The Sunfire also has the ability to drive a pair of up-front, side-wall-mounted effects speakers (called "side-axis" speakers), and those also imposed a degree of spaciousness and depth to the sound - and could do so even with the new Dolby and DTS modes in operation. In that respect, the Sunfire has a leg up on the Yamaha. Speaking of adjustments, the DPL II version offers up three adjustment options that allow the user to adjust or engage several parameters to accommodate room size and shape, the listening position, and most importantly, taste. One, called "dimension," allows the user to shift the emitting soundfield further towards the front or rear of the room. A second, the aforementioned "center width" adjustment, allows one to vary the center imaging from a phantom mode to a solidly center-focussed mode, with a number of combinations in between. The most radical of these adjustment options is "panorama," which partially incorporates the surround channels into the soundstaging. The result is a wraparound effect that is not exactly my cup of tea. However, if you have been thrilled with some of the 5.1-channel musical presentations featuring "sound in the round" from all channels, the panorama mode might appeal to you. It did not appeal to me, however. To summarize. Prior to DPL II and Neo:6, the only way an enthusiast could enjoy the benefits of high-tech, surround-sound signal enhancements with their two-channel source material was to spring for some pretty expensive DSP ambiance-synthesis hardware. All that has changed. For the most part, Dolby Pro Logic II (Music) and DTS Neo:6 (Music) are important advances in the art of simulating a live musical performance from two-channel source material. DPL II (Music) goes Neo:6 (Music) one better, because it does allow for more adjustment parameters, although Neo:6 works terrifically right out of the box, and it also includes a center-back feed. The best thing about both is that they are now available in a large number of audio/video receivers and processors, and some of those are reasonably priced. Indeed, this is the primarily reason why they are so revolutionary and should be of interest to every sensible enthusiast. End of "excerpted" section from the article. Howard Ferstler |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
I wrote about soundstaging and imaging in a column once for The Sensible Sound That was a long time ago, before you were branded as a fraud. and also posted an excerpt from that column in response to a comment about soundstaging in another thread. Which no one read. Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but Nobody responded to it because you are a disgraced audio fraud, and you have nothing to contribute here. Most people are wondering how desperate and lonely your life must be for you to try and come back here and pretend nothing happened. also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), We don't want to discuss audio with YOU. You are a jerk, a tweako-freako, and a blackguard. and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: Which was obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else views on the subject. Why don't you ask them to discuss here in person instead. It is well-known that you have no original ideas about audio, and that you only parrot what is being prompted to you by others. Oh, and get a life. Boon |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marc Phillips wrote:
Howard said: I wrote about soundstaging and imaging in a column once for The Sensible Sound That was a long time ago, before you were branded as a fraud. and also posted an excerpt from that column in response to a comment about soundstaging in another thread. Which no one read. I believe that in the introduction I mentioned something about intellectual inadequacies being a problem for certain readers. No doubt that group includes you. Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but Nobody responded to it because you are a disgraced audio fraud, Say, have I mentioned that The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (which has me as a major contributor and editor) is due out this month? Have I mentioned that I am still publishing articles? I have only been disgraced in the minds of audio fatheads such as yourself. and you have nothing to contribute here. Only because this place mostly mimics a lunatic asylum. Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Most people are wondering how desperate and lonely your life must be for you to try and come back here and pretend nothing happened. Hey, who's pretending? Actually, I come back here at times to just unsettle skin-crawling, sub-intellectual creepos like you. also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), We don't want to discuss audio with YOU. You are a jerk, a tweako-freako, and a blackguard. You do not want to discuss audio with me, because you are too stupid to understand much of what I say. and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: Which was obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else views on the subject. Nope. All my own, original stuff. Read the article. Go then go forth into the audio-world wilderness and find where anyone has said the same things about soundstaging and imaging. Why don't you ask them to discuss here in person instead. It is well-known that you have no original ideas about audio, and that you only parrot what is being prompted to you by others. Well, few people, anywhere, have fully original ideas about much of anything. However, unlike you, who are an obdurate blowhard, I do indeed have some nifty and original things to say about audio, particularly when it comes to imaging and soundstaging. Howard Ferstler |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: I wrote about soundstaging and imaging in a column once for The Sensible Sound That was a long time ago, before you were branded as a fraud. and also posted an excerpt from that column in response to a comment about soundstaging in another thread. Which no one read. I believe that in the introduction I mentioned something about intellectual inadequacies being a problem for certain readers. No doubt that group includes you. I doubt it, slick. For instance, if I had been caught plagiarizing on a Usenet newsgroup, I'd be smart enough to never show my face there again. Obviously, the same cannot be said about you. Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but Nobody responded to it because you are a disgraced audio fraud, Say, have I mentioned that The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (which has me as a major contributor and editor) is due out this month? Have I mentioned that I am still publishing articles? I have only been disgraced in the minds of audio fatheads such as yourself. The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound was delayed for quite a long time, undoubtedly because people had to be assigned to research everything you submitted to make sure no other plagiarism had occured. And perhaps you'd like to explain why you are no longer writing for TAV. Let's face it. Work has slowed down for you since your fraudulant episode. and you have nothing to contribute here. Only because this place mostly mimics a lunatic asylum. Fueled by your friend, Arny Krueger, the pedophile, and his various sockpuppet supporters. And we all know that you told someone in the audio world that you didn't mind that Arny was a pedophile, because it was more important to have an ally in the fight against the EHEE. You sound like a lunatic to me. Maybe you do belong here. Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Nice generalization there. In the real world, I help people daily with audio matters, and I get thanked daily. In the six years I've written about audio, not one person has complained that I gave them bad advice. Most people are wondering how desperate and lonely your life must be for you to try and come back here and pretend nothing happened. Hey, who's pretending? Actually, I come back here at times to just unsettle skin-crawling, sub-intellectual creepos like you. No, you don't. You come back here because you need us more than we need you (which isn't difficult, since no one here "needs" you). You can't stay away. You are addicted to the Internet, and you are addicted to RAO. The months you spent exiled from here were the worst times in your life. And you lurked here almost daily, because whenever your name was mentioned, there you were. also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), We don't want to discuss audio with YOU. You are a jerk, a tweako-freako, and a blackguard. You do not want to discuss audio with me, because you are too stupid to understand much of what I say. I've discussed audio with you. I found you pedestrian, unoriginal, boorish, narrow-minded, and unable to elaborate your point without retreating to get more information from your keepers. I've even discussed your boorish behavior in print. and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: Which was obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else views on the subject. Nope. All my own, original stuff. Read the article. Go then go forth into the audio-world wilderness and find where anyone has said the same things about soundstaging and imaging. I find it difficult to get past the first few paragraphs of anything you write, because you are the most boring writer I've ever seen. Why don't you ask them to discuss here in person instead. It is well-known that you have no original ideas about audio, and that you only parrot what is being prompted to you by others. Well, few people, anywhere, have fully original ideas about much of anything. However, unlike you, who are an obdurate blowhard, I do indeed have some nifty and original things to say about audio, particularly when it comes to imaging and soundstaging. In your own fantasy world, Internet geek. Boon |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard Ferstler said:
Say, have I mentioned that The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (which has me as a major contributor and editor) is due out this month? Have I mentioned that I am still publishing articles? Only a couple of thousands of times, Howard. Alzheimer raising its ugly head again? -- Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat. - R. Heinlein |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marc Phillips wrote:
Howard said: Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but Nobody responded to it because you are a disgraced audio fraud, Say, have I mentioned that The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (which has me as a major contributor and editor) is due out this month? Have I mentioned that I am still publishing articles? I have only been disgraced in the minds of audio fatheads such as yourself. The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound was delayed for quite a long time, undoubtedly because people had to be assigned to research everything you submitted to make sure no other plagiarism had occured. And perhaps you'd like to explain why you are no longer writing for TAV. Actually, I do not write as much as I did in the past for any magazine, and have voluntarily backed off. Becoming lazy in my old age. I might do some work for Gene Pitts again one of these days, but right now I have all I can handle writing for TSS. I enjoy writing for Gene, and maybe he will send me some exotic speakers to audition one of these days. The last package, some terrific NHT Evolution models, were fun as hell to fool with. Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. Let's face it. Work has slowed down for you since your fraudulant episode. Only because I choose to slow it down. Trust me, virtually none of the people I write for give a flip about what happens here and none want me to back off. Actually, I tried to retire from magazine work a while back and the publisher phoned me and worked overtime to get me to change my mind. One of my book publishers contacted me a while back and wanted me to do another book. I passed, because magazine work is easier and pays more - and the book he wanted me to write had already been written by someone else. Good book, too. Regarding writing in general, I decided to stick out the magazine work for several reasons: 1. Money. Yep, I get paid for my work. 2. Glory. Yep, one publisher told me that he could not imagine audio without Howard Ferstler as a writer. I am apparently quite the audio celebrity in some circles, in spite of my reclusive nature. 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. 4. Testing stuff is usually fun - and educational. The more I do it, the more I validate what I have been saying about audio for years. It is a great feeling to discover again that you are correct. 5. Writing helps to keep brain cells proliferating well into old age. Keeps some people sharp - not you, though. 6. I get free copies of the magazines. This lets me read other writers for nothing. 7. Makes it easy for me to contact audio notables and bounce ideas off of them. 8. Doing so annoys you guys. and you have nothing to contribute here. Only because this place mostly mimics a lunatic asylum. Fueled by your friend, Arny Krueger, the pedophile, and his various sockpuppet supporters. And we all know that you told someone in the audio world that you didn't mind that Arny was a pedophile, because it was more important to have an ally in the fight against the EHEE. Actually, I think you and a few others here have invented a demon with Arny. That you seem obsessed with pedophiliac behavior says more about you than about him. Lots more. Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Nice generalization there. In the real world, I help people daily with audio matters, and I get thanked daily. Get thanked daily? I imagine that so did Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam. In the six years I've written about audio, not one person has complained that I gave them bad advice. Again proving that ignorance is bliss. The average Best Buy customer probably feels the same way. Most people are wondering how desperate and lonely your life must be for you to try and come back here and pretend nothing happened. Hey, who's pretending? Actually, I come back here at times to just unsettle skin-crawling, sub-intellectual creepos like you. No, you don't. You come back here because you need us more than we need you (which isn't difficult, since no one here "needs" you). You can't stay away. Sure I can. Hell, I stayed away for several months. You obviously did not stay away, however. Again, your comments say more about you than they do about me. You are addicted to the Internet, and you are addicted to RAO. The months you spent exiled from here were the worst times in your life. And you lurked here almost daily, because whenever your name was mentioned, there you were. Actually, if you check back you will see that I rarely came on board and posted anything. Trust me, if I had really been lurking I would also have been posting. As for me being obsessed with hanging around, look at the pot calling the kettle black. also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), We don't want to discuss audio with YOU. You are a jerk, a tweako-freako, and a blackguard. You do not want to discuss audio with me, because you are too stupid to understand much of what I say. I've discussed audio with you. I found you pedestrian, unoriginal, boorish, narrow-minded, and unable to elaborate your point without retreating to get more information from your keepers. I've even discussed your boorish behavior in print. See, I told you I was I was an audio celebrity in some circles. Actually, if I had the kind of attitude you clowns have I would start scoping for the printed material you mentioned and be ready to phone my lawyer. However, I relish you printing material about me, bad or good. Remember what I said about celebrity. and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: Which was obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else views on the subject. Nope. All my own, original stuff. Read the article. Go then go forth into the audio-world wilderness and find where anyone has said the same things about soundstaging and imaging. I find it difficult to get past the first few paragraphs of anything you write, because you are the most boring writer I've ever seen. Obviously, one will have long-term comprehension problems if most of the material they read comes from tweako publications and the newspaper comics page. Why don't you ask them to discuss here in person instead. It is well-known that you have no original ideas about audio, and that you only parrot what is being prompted to you by others. Well, few people, anywhere, have fully original ideas about much of anything. However, unlike you, who are an obdurate blowhard, I do indeed have some nifty and original things to say about audio, particularly when it comes to imaging and soundstaging. In your own fantasy world, Internet geek. Come on - go read the article. It will help you regenerate some of those brain cells. Howard Ferstler |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: Nobody seems to have responded to it (possibly, because the topic and discussion sailed right over the collected RAO heads, but Nobody responded to it because you are a disgraced audio fraud, Say, have I mentioned that The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (which has me as a major contributor and editor) is due out this month? Have I mentioned that I am still publishing articles? I have only been disgraced in the minds of audio fatheads such as yourself. The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound was delayed for quite a long time, undoubtedly because people had to be assigned to research everything you submitted to make sure no other plagiarism had occured. And perhaps you'd like to explain why you are no longer writing for TAV. Actually, I do not write as much as I did in the past for any magazine, and have voluntarily backed off. Becoming lazy in my old age. I might do some work for Gene Pitts again one of these days, but right now I have all I can handle writing for TSS. I enjoy writing for Gene, and maybe he will send me some exotic speakers to audition one of these days. The last package, some terrific NHT Evolution models, were fun as hell to fool with. Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. And we're supposed to take the word of a known plagiarist that all of this is true? Let's face it. Work has slowed down for you since your fraudulant episode. Only because I choose to slow it down. Trust me, virtually none of the people I write for give a flip about what happens here and none want me to back off. Except for the fact that news of your plagiarism spread beyond the walls of RAO. Actually, I tried to retire from magazine work a while back and the publisher phoned me and worked overtime to get me to change my mind. One of my book publishers contacted me a while back and wanted me to do another book. I passed, because magazine work is easier and pays more - and the book he wanted me to write had already been written by someone else. Good book, too. Regarding writing in general, I decided to stick out the magazine work for several reasons: 1. Money. Yep, I get paid for my work. 2. Glory. Yep, one publisher told me that he could not imagine audio without Howard Ferstler as a writer. I am apparently quite the audio celebrity in some circles, in spite of my reclusive nature. 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. 4. Testing stuff is usually fun - and educational. The more I do it, the more I validate what I have been saying about audio for years. It is a great feeling to discover again that you are correct. 5. Writing helps to keep brain cells proliferating well into old age. Keeps some people sharp - not you, though. 6. I get free copies of the magazines. This lets me read other writers for nothing. 7. Makes it easy for me to contact audio notables and bounce ideas off of them. 8. Doing so annoys you guys. 1-7 are correct. 8 is a fantasy of yours. and you have nothing to contribute here. Only because this place mostly mimics a lunatic asylum. Fueled by your friend, Arny Krueger, the pedophile, and his various sockpuppet supporters. And we all know that you told someone in the audio world that you didn't mind that Arny was a pedophile, because it was more important to have an ally in the fight against the EHEE. Actually, I think you and a few others here have invented a demon with Arny. That you seem obsessed with pedophiliac behavior says more about you than about him. Lots more. That's an easy cop-out that Arny likes to use. That you would use it too is very suspicious. In essence you are saying that it is wrong to be bothered by the presence of a sex offender. If the world agreed with you, it would not be mandatory for sex offenders to notify a neighborhood that they are moving in. You and Arny against the world, eh, Howard? Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Nice generalization there. In the real world, I help people daily with audio matters, and I get thanked daily. Get thanked daily? I imagine that so did Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam. Non-response noted. It indicates that fan mail is an alien concept to you. Good thing those as-yet unnamed publishers think the world of you, eh? In the six years I've written about audio, not one person has complained that I gave them bad advice. Again proving that ignorance is bliss. The average Best Buy customer probably feels the same way. So, in other words, no one has ever thanked you for your audio advice. Most people are wondering how desperate and lonely your life must be for you to try and come back here and pretend nothing happened. Hey, who's pretending? Actually, I come back here at times to just unsettle skin-crawling, sub-intellectual creepos like you. No, you don't. You come back here because you need us more than we need you (which isn't difficult, since no one here "needs" you). You can't stay away. Sure I can. Hell, I stayed away for several months. You obviously did not stay away, however. Again, your comments say more about you than they do about me. No, they don't. I wasn't caught plagiarizing. I have no reason to leave. In fact, just a few days ago, I met with two other RAO regulars and listened to music all day and then had a wonderful meal. My friends are here. There's no reason for me to leave. You, however, are reviled and pitied here. I wonder why you stay. You are addicted to the Internet, and you are addicted to RAO. The months you spent exiled from here were the worst times in your life. And you lurked here almost daily, because whenever your name was mentioned, there you were. Actually, if you check back you will see that I rarely came on board and posted anything. Trust me, if I had really been lurking I would also have been posting. When your name was mentioned, you did. As for me being obsessed with hanging around, look at the pot calling the kettle black. Where? also possibly because most of those who read my stuff here are more interested in delivering jabs than in discussing audio), We don't want to discuss audio with YOU. You are a jerk, a tweako-freako, and a blackguard. You do not want to discuss audio with me, because you are too stupid to understand much of what I say. I've discussed audio with you. I found you pedestrian, unoriginal, boorish, narrow-minded, and unable to elaborate your point without retreating to get more information from your keepers. I've even discussed your boorish behavior in print. See, I told you I was I was an audio celebrity in some circles. Actually, if I had the kind of attitude you clowns have I would start scoping for the printed material you mentioned and be ready to phone my lawyer. Actually, if you didn't suffer from severe short-term memory loss, you'd realize that I posted the link to the article just a few weeks ago, and you commented upon it. However, I relish you printing material about me, bad or good. Remember what I said about celebrity. Yes. "Read my books! Read my books!" and so here again is an edited "excerpt" of several sections from that column: Which was obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else views on the subject. Nope. All my own, original stuff. Read the article. Go then go forth into the audio-world wilderness and find where anyone has said the same things about soundstaging and imaging. I find it difficult to get past the first few paragraphs of anything you write, because you are the most boring writer I've ever seen. Obviously, one will have long-term comprehension problems if most of the material they read comes from tweako publications and the newspaper comics page. Yes, I agree with that. I'm not sure why you're mentioning it now, though. Why don't you ask them to discuss here in person instead. It is well-known that you have no original ideas about audio, and that you only parrot what is being prompted to you by others. Well, few people, anywhere, have fully original ideas about much of anything. However, unlike you, who are an obdurate blowhard, I do indeed have some nifty and original things to say about audio, particularly when it comes to imaging and soundstaging. In your own fantasy world, Internet geek. Come on - go read the article. It will help you regenerate some of those brain cells. No, it won't. Boon |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:47:48 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote: Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. Actually, this isn't true at all. It was *not* a "phantom of your mind" but a real issue. The only way that you will convince me otherwise is if you didn't have to alter the article that you were so proud of. If the *published* Peter Walker entry matches what you posted here originally (the one that had the almost unchanged verbiage from the Quad website), I'll admit that apparently it was "no big deal". BTW, let me know when the "USENET audio wacko" article comes out so I can send my letter to the editor noting this very issue. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:47:48 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote: 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. So basically it's just ad copy. Cool gig indeed. Of course, it has about the same level of integrity. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message ... Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: [snip] 2. Glory. Yep, one publisher told me that he could not imagine audio without Howard Ferstler as a writer. I am apparently quite the audio celebrity in some circles, in spite of my reclusive nature. Has it ever occurred to you that he was putting his nose deeply in the folds of your gluteus maximus? You're not reclusive. You are a compulsive usenet exhibitionist. Otherwise, you wouldn't be talking to us, because you know we despise you. 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. That is corrupt. I always suspected you were corrupt, Howard. 4. Testing stuff is usually fun - and educational. The more I do it, the more I validate what I have been saying about audio for years. It is a great feeling to discover again that you are correct. With constant practice, I'm sure you can learn the position of the on-off switch. Retention is another problem. 5. Writing helps to keep brain cells proliferating well into old age. Keeps some people sharp - not you, though. Howard, you may have a glioblastoma multiforme. Proliferation of these cells will not make you smarter. 6. I get free copies of the magazines. This lets me read other writers for nothing. But of course. Where else could you get material for articles? 7. Makes it easy for me to contact audio notables and bounce ideas off of them. The correct word is "plonk", not "bounce." What ideas for destruction of the audio world do you try to foist on them? 8. Doing so annoys you guys. That is emblematic of great mental health. You become hateful in your old age, and put it out on usenet. Howard, this is one thing you're genuinely good at -- you're a hater! |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
dave said:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:47:48 -0400, Howard Ferstler wrote: 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. So basically it's just ad copy. Cool gig indeed. Of course, it has about the same level of integrity. When I wrote for Ultimate Audio, I was informed that most audio distributors would give me stuff at the "reviewer" price, which was 50% off. I was tempted to take advantage a couple of times (especially with a Benz-Micro H2O), but something always seemed kind of hinky about the whole thing, so I refrained. I do still get free LPs and CDs from a couple of labels, but I can't seem to make them stop, and I never really asked in the first place. When you have limited means, like Howard, I guess you tend to take everything you can get, ethics be damned. Boon |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marc Phillips wrote:
Howard said: Actually, I do not write as much as I did in the past for any magazine, and have voluntarily backed off. Becoming lazy in my old age. I might do some work for Gene Pitts again one of these days, but right now I have all I can handle writing for TSS. I enjoy writing for Gene, and maybe he will send me some exotic speakers to audition one of these days. The last package, some terrific NHT Evolution models, were fun as hell to fool with. Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. And we're supposed to take the word of a known plagiarist that all of this is true? Contact them and ask for details. The book is coming out. It has my contributions. I love this "known plagiarist" comment of yours. You fixate on it the same way you fixate on "pedophile" when dealing with Arny. Actually, your tactic is typical for someone who knows little about the topic at hand. Rather than deal with audio, you divert issues and deal with people you dislike and hammer away at irrelevant themes. My guess is that you are a tricky and somewhat ignorant little tweako audio journalist or sales clerk who has a vested interest in baloney. Let's face it. Work has slowed down for you since your fraudulant episode. Only because I choose to slow it down. Trust me, virtually none of the people I write for give a flip about what happens here and none want me to back off. Except for the fact that news of your plagiarism spread beyond the walls of RAO. Yeah, and gravity pulls us upward. But I will give you a chance. Go do me some damage with your observations. Go ahead, spud, do me some damage. Actually, I think you and a few others here have invented a demon with Arny. That you seem obsessed with pedophiliac behavior says more about you than about him. Lots more. That's an easy cop-out that Arny likes to use. That you would use it too is very suspicious. In essence you are saying that it is wrong to be bothered by the presence of a sex offender. The sex offender thing is your invention, spud, or certainly your private fixation. Arny forgets more about audio in a week than you have learned in your entire life. You resent that, and to divert threads away from that fact you create a fabricated monster and then rail against it. If the world agreed with you, it would not be mandatory for sex offenders to notify a neighborhood that they are moving in. You and Arny against the world, eh, Howard? No, pal, me and Arny against you, although only at reduced energy levels. You do not rate serious treatment. Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Nice generalization there. In the real world, I help people daily with audio matters, and I get thanked daily. Get thanked daily? I imagine that so did Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam. Non-response noted. It indicates that fan mail is an alien concept to you. Good thing those as-yet unnamed publishers think the world of you, eh? The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound is due out shortly. In the six years I've written about audio, not one person has complained that I gave them bad advice. Again proving that ignorance is bliss. The average Best Buy customer probably feels the same way. So, in other words, no one has ever thanked you for your audio advice. I get paid for my work, spud. Trust me, many a Best Buy clerk has also been thanked for his help after selling somebody a set of fairly expensive wires, and I suppose many high-end clerks have been thanked for selling someone wires that cost more than his speakers. I wonder how many people you have suckered into purchasing expensive wires and line conditioners, or overpriced amps and CD players. Yes, you are quite the moral gentleman, spud. Sure I can. Hell, I stayed away for several months. You obviously did not stay away, however. Again, your comments say more about you than they do about me. No, they don't. Oh, yes they do. Yes they do! Haw, haw, haw. I wasn't caught plagiarizing. A claim of skill on your part. Your criminal abilities are profound. I have no reason to leave. In fact, just a few days ago, I met with two other RAO regulars and listened to music all day and then had a wonderful meal. My friends are here. There's no reason for me to leave. RAO: the fool's paradise. You, however, are reviled and pitied here. I wonder why you stay. To bug guys like you, spud, and to protect newbies from being buffaloed by you and your crew. You are addicted to the Internet, and you are addicted to RAO. The months you spent exiled from here were the worst times in your life. And you lurked here almost daily, because whenever your name was mentioned, there you were. Actually, if you check back you will see that I rarely came on board and posted anything. Trust me, if I had really been lurking I would also have been posting. When your name was mentioned, you did. Yeah, funny coincidence. However, if you check around a bit I have recently been posting quite a bit in places where my name did not show up at all. However, for the past few months before I got rolling again that did not happen. Do you really think I would have let you guys get away with spouting your standard claptrap if I had been scoping the threads for all those months? I've discussed audio with you. I found you pedestrian, unoriginal, boorish, narrow-minded, and unable to elaborate your point without retreating to get more information from your keepers. I've even discussed your boorish behavior in print. See, I told you I was I was an audio celebrity in some circles. Actually, if I had the kind of attitude you clowns have I would start scoping for the printed material you mentioned and be ready to phone my lawyer. Actually, if you didn't suffer from severe short-term memory loss, you'd realize that I posted the link to the article just a few weeks ago, and you commented upon it. I rather think not. In any case, keep posting comments about me all over the place. My editors and publishers, bless their crafty little hearts, like that sort of thing. However, I relish you printing material about me, bad or good. Remember what I said about celebrity. Yes. "Read my books! Read my books!" Actually, two of my four books are kind of out of date (not to mention out of print), although the material about amps, speakers, CD players, etc. is still relevant, and of course my jabs about goofy gimmicks like exotic wires, line conditioners, and other baloney, as well as about overpriced amps, players, and even speakers are still on the mark. So, the books, particularly The Home Theater Companion, would still be good used-book discount purchases. On the other hand, my two record-review books are still OK (although the first one is long out of print), provided one can find the recordings reviewed. Obviously, some will no longer be available. Still, the comments hold, and of course I continue to review recordings for The Sensible Sound, and also write commentary columns and review some hardware. So, if one cannot read my books at least they should read my magazine materials. Come on - go read the article. It will help you regenerate some of those brain cells. No, it won't. Well, some people are simply beyond the cure, but I do suggest a regular diet of fish as a possible fix. Howard Ferstler |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
dave weil wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:47:48 -0400, Howard Ferstler wrote: Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. Actually, this isn't true at all. It was *not* a "phantom of your mind" but a real issue. Only in the mind of a bunch of RAO tweakos. The only way that you will convince me otherwise is if you didn't have to alter the article that you were so proud of. If the *published* Peter Walker entry matches what you posted here originally (the one that had the almost unchanged verbiage from the Quad website), I'll admit that apparently it was "no big deal". I changed it to make you happy, Dave. BTW, let me know when the "USENET audio wacko" article comes out so I can send my letter to the editor noting this very issue. Stay tuned and on the edge of that seat of yours, Dave. Howard Ferstler |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
dave weil wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:47:48 -0400, Howard Ferstler wrote: 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. So basically it's just ad copy. Cool gig indeed. Of course, it has about the same level of integrity. Read some of the reviews. Nobody gets a free ride from me, and I do go over the performance aspects pretty well and manage to do some rather original evaluating. However, I do make a point of reviewing stuff that is at least good, which saves me a lot of grief. Well, almost at least good. I have done a few sour-note reviews on products that were not so hot. Even have done that with speakers, and of course there is the commentary article that Fred Davis and I did on wires and line conditioners in issue 89 of TSS. Howard Ferstler |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marc Phillips wrote:
When I wrote for Ultimate Audio, I was informed that most audio distributors would give me stuff at the "reviewer" price, which was 50% off. I was tempted to take advantage a couple of times (especially with a Benz-Micro H2O), but something always seemed kind of hinky about the whole thing, so I refrained. And went out and paid list price for the thing. Yeah. Actually, the reviewer is doing a manufacturer a favor if they do a purchase. (I always note if I purchased the component in my reviews.) This is because they do not have to pay for return shipping and then deal with a used item. Also, if the component is a good one you might mention it later on in another review as part of a comparison. Nothing wrong with that, provided you tell the truth about the stuff you have on hand. (Of course, why say great things about a piece of junk and then accept that junk at a discount price to use in your system?) Actually, in order to do good reviewing a reviewer needs a lot of gear on hand, so that he can do decent comparing. I keep stuff hanging around just for jobs like that. There have been times when I had stuff piled all over the place for months. The wife got tired of it, even though I built a new air-conditioned storage area attached to the house. I do still get free LPs and CDs from a couple of labels, but I can't seem to make them stop, and I never really asked in the first place. I get them too, although no LPs are sent, needless to say. Some outfits just keep pumping them in my direction. I also have regular connections with outfits that send review copies from lists and catalogs they have previously sent or emailed to me. Of course, I also write reviews of those recordings. Some are good; some are, well, not so good. I state that in the reviews. When you have limited means, like Howard, I guess you tend to take everything you can get, ethics be damned. Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Howard Ferstler |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Robert Morein wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message ... Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: [snip] 2. Glory. Yep, one publisher told me that he could not imagine audio without Howard Ferstler as a writer. I am apparently quite the audio celebrity in some circles, in spite of my reclusive nature. Has it ever occurred to you that he was putting his nose deeply in the folds of your gluteus maximus? Well, he does like what I write. It was not for nothing that he was laying on the complements. You're not reclusive. You are a compulsive usenet exhibitionist. Otherwise, you wouldn't be talking to us, because you know we despise you. Only you goofballs despise me, and the feeling is borderline mutual. Borderline, because you are not significant enough for me to work up the energy required to despise. Here is my take on you clowns. I think that guys like you are doing more to undermine upscale audio (as opposed to tweako-freako audio) than any economic turndown - or even more than the explosion in home theater. Because of guys like you, few intellectually serious individuals get excited about high-end hardware. You have so wrecked the hobby with your nonsense about exotic wires, goofy accessories, overpriced amps and players, and ultra-megabuck speakers that people with any amount of sense have backed off and just gone to Best Buy and picked up some basic hardware. I suppose I should just let you idiots rant and rave here, since you are basically a fringe group. However, I find you so offensive as individuals that I simply have to drop in on occasion and rescue some of the newbies from the muck that you call information. 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. That is corrupt. I always suspected you were corrupt, Howard. How corrupt? I mean, I sure as hell am not going to purchase a junk product, no matter how good the discount, and it would make no sense at all to give such a product a good review just because of a discount price. And I am doing the manufacturer a favor if I do purchase something, because he does not have to pay return shipping for a used component. Actually, I rather think that you are maybe a tad jealous, Biff. 4. Testing stuff is usually fun - and educational. The more I do it, the more I validate what I have been saying about audio for years. It is a great feeling to discover again that you are correct. With constant practice, I'm sure you can learn the position of the on-off switch. Retention is another problem. As opposed to you, who, instead of testing gear to refine and expand upon previous knowledge learned from earlier testing, retain your cock and bull beliefs with zero evidence. 5. Writing helps to keep brain cells proliferating well into old age. Keeps some people sharp - not you, though. Howard, you may have a glioblastoma multiforme. Proliferation of these cells will not make you smarter. As I said above, not you, though. 6. I get free copies of the magazines. This lets me read other writers for nothing. But of course. Where else could you get material for articles? Hey, there have been times when most of the articles in those free magazines were written by me. I defy you to find one technical or review magazine article I have done where I copied some else's ideas or observations without giving them credit. Talk is cheap, Biff, and you make it even cheaper. 7. Makes it easy for me to contact audio notables and bounce ideas off of them. The correct word is "plonk", not "bounce." What ideas for destruction of the audio world do you try to foist on them? Well, most of those individuals certainly agree with me when it comes to the goofy approach to audio we have with guys like you. 8. Doing so annoys you guys. That is emblematic of great mental health. You become hateful in your old age, and put it out on usenet. Not hateful. Just annoyed, with a bit of detestation thrown in for extra flavor. Howard, this is one thing you're genuinely good at -- you're a hater! Only to those with a juvenile mindset. Howard Ferstler |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
"George M. Middius" wrote:
Brother Horace does his version of leading by example. you are a tricky and somewhat ignorant little tweako audio journalist or sales clerk who has a vested interest in baloney. spud, do me some damage. your invention, spud my work, spud "You would pull a lot more weight around here if you could graduate from name calling, profanity, and sometimes comical comments and start actually saying something intelligent about audio." Did I hurt your feelings when I posted that same comment about you a while back, Middius? Howard Ferstler |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message ... Robert Morein wrote: "Howard Ferstler" wrote in message ... Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: [snip] 2. Glory. Yep, one publisher told me that he could not imagine audio without Howard Ferstler as a writer. I am apparently quite the audio celebrity in some circles, in spite of my reclusive nature. Has it ever occurred to you that he was putting his nose deeply in the folds of your gluteus maximus? Well, he does like what I write. It was not for nothing that he was laying on the complements. Certainly not with respect to your spelling skills. Read the above sentence. [snip] 3. Perks. Yep, I get accommodation prices on the gear I review. That is corrupt. I always suspected you were corrupt, Howard. How corrupt? I mean, I sure as hell am not going to purchase a junk product, no matter how good the discount, and it would make no sense at all to give such a product a good review just because of a discount price. And I am doing the manufacturer a favor if I do purchase something, because he does not have to pay return shipping for a used component. Actually, I rather think that you are maybe a tad jealous, Biff. No, just disgusted that you are corrupt and try to mingle with us. You are CORRUPT!!! EVIL!!! Get it? Howard, get the hell outta here. You're a moral degenerate. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
No, just disgusted that you are corrupt and try to mingle with us.
You are CORRUPT!!! EVIL!!! Get it? Howard, get the hell outta here. You're a moral degenerate. Er...this wouldn't be hyperbole, would it? |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... "You would pull a lot more weight around here if you could graduate from name calling, profanity, and sometimes comical comments and start actually saying something intelligent about audio." Sounds like a quote from our favorite Professional Audio Clown. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul Packer said:
No, just disgusted that you are corrupt and try to mingle with us. You are CORRUPT!!! EVIL!!! Get it? Howard, get the hell outta here. You're a moral degenerate. Er...this wouldn't be hyperbole, would it? You haven't spent enough time with Howard, have you. Basically he is mentally ill. And that's not hyperbole, either. Boon |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
Marc Phillips wrote: When I wrote for Ultimate Audio, I was informed that most audio distributors would give me stuff at the "reviewer" price, which was 50% off. I was tempted to take advantage a couple of times (especially with a Benz-Micro H2O), but something always seemed kind of hinky about the whole thing, so I refrained. And went out and paid list price for the thing. Yeah. I didn't buy it at all. Thanks again for speculating wildly and trying to pass it off as a valid argument. Actually, the reviewer is doing a manufacturer a favor if they do a purchase. (I always note if I purchased the component in my reviews.) This is because they do not have to pay for return shipping and then deal with a used item. Also, if the component is a good one you might mention it later on in another review as part of a comparison. Thanks for agreeing with me. Nothing wrong with that, provided you tell the truth about the stuff you have on hand. (Of course, why say great things about a piece of junk and then accept that junk at a discount price to use in your system?) Actually, in order to do good reviewing a reviewer needs a lot of gear on hand, so that he can do decent comparing. I keep stuff hanging around just for jobs like that. There have been times when I had stuff piled all over the place for months. The wife got tired of it, even though I built a new air-conditioned storage area attached to the house. I do still get free LPs and CDs from a couple of labels, but I can't seem to make them stop, and I never really asked in the first place. I get them too, although no LPs are sent, needless to say. Some outfits just keep pumping them in my direction. I also have regular connections with outfits that send review copies from lists and catalogs they have previously sent or emailed to me. Of course, I also write reviews of those recordings. Some are good; some are, well, not so good. I state that in the reviews. When you have limited means, like Howard, I guess you tend to take everything you can get, ethics be damned. Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Why do you need to defend your financial situation all the time? That's what poor people do. Boon |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
Marc Phillips wrote: Howard said: Actually, I do not write as much as I did in the past for any magazine, and have voluntarily backed off. Becoming lazy in my old age. I might do some work for Gene Pitts again one of these days, but right now I have all I can handle writing for TSS. I enjoy writing for Gene, and maybe he will send me some exotic speakers to audition one of these days. The last package, some terrific NHT Evolution models, were fun as hell to fool with. Trust me, Routledge (which is a branch of Taylor & Francis, one of the largest publishers in the world) is not about to let a plagiarizer put material into one of their books. The plagiarism thing (and its supposed seriousness as presented on this pint-sized, often dysfunctional chat group) is more a phantom of your mind than anything that would trouble a major publisher. And we're supposed to take the word of a known plagiarist that all of this is true? Contact them and ask for details. The book is coming out. It has my contributions. I love this "known plagiarist" comment of yours. You fixate on it the same way you fixate on "pedophile" when dealing with Arny. Well, I consider both you and Arny to suffer from the same mental disease that defines all Internet geeks, that you both try to make yourselves seem more important and powerful on the Internet than you are in real life. Neither of you do a very good job of convincing others of this, which again is a symptom of your condition. Actually, your tactic is typical for someone who knows little about the topic at hand. Rather than deal with audio, you divert issues and deal with people you dislike and hammer away at irrelevant themes. My guess is that you are a tricky and somewhat ignorant little tweako audio journalist or sales clerk who has a vested interest in baloney. Your guess, as always, is wrong. But keep speculating wildly, slick. Let's face it. Work has slowed down for you since your fraudulant episode. Only because I choose to slow it down. Trust me, virtually none of the people I write for give a flip about what happens here and none want me to back off. Except for the fact that news of your plagiarism spread beyond the walls of RAO. Yeah, and gravity pulls us upward. But I will give you a chance. Go do me some damage with your observations. Go ahead, spud, do me some damage. I know you're constantly vexed by this memory problem you have, but the damage is done. Just because you don't realize it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Actually, I think you and a few others here have invented a demon with Arny. That you seem obsessed with pedophiliac behavior says more about you than about him. Lots more. That's an easy cop-out that Arny likes to use. That you would use it too is very suspicious. In essence you are saying that it is wrong to be bothered by the presence of a sex offender. The sex offender thing is your invention, spud, or certainly your private fixation. Arny forgets more about audio in a week than you have learned in your entire life. You resent that, and to divert threads away from that fact you create a fabricated monster and then rail against it. That's a very weird explanation. The simple fact is Arny made a post about child pornography on an audio forum that, as a father, sickened me to my very core. Now you're saying that complaining about Arny's diversion is a diversion itself from audio. I manage to post on other audio forums without creating these supposed diversions. Why? Because they are moderated, and people like Arny and yourself wouldn't be able to survive there. Arny has been blackballed from RAHE...did you know that, slick? Thanks again for speculating wildly instead of offering genuine, logical responses. If the world agreed with you, it would not be mandatory for sex offenders to notify a neighborhood that they are moving in. You and Arny against the world, eh, Howard? No, pal, me and Arny against you, although only at reduced energy levels. You do not rate serious treatment. I don't think Arny agrees. I think Arny hates me with every ounce of his being. I think you hate me, too. You can pretend that I don't bother you, but if I really didn't rate serious treatment, you wouldn't spend so much time rebutting me (with mere speculation, much to your dismay). Actually, I imagine that there are a number of people here on RAO who are both able to digest what I posted regarding soundstaging and willing and able to learn something beyond the baloney that people like you post. Nice generalization there. In the real world, I help people daily with audio matters, and I get thanked daily. Get thanked daily? I imagine that so did Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam. Non-response noted. It indicates that fan mail is an alien concept to you. Failure to respond noted. Good thing those as-yet unnamed publishers think the world of you, eh? The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound is due out shortly. You've been saying that for years. In the six years I've written about audio, not one person has complained that I gave them bad advice. Again proving that ignorance is bliss. The average Best Buy customer probably feels the same way. So, in other words, no one has ever thanked you for your audio advice. I get paid for my work, spud. So do I, slick. Trust me, many a Best Buy clerk has also been thanked for his help after selling somebody a set of fairly expensive wires, Name a set of fairly expensive wires sold at Best Buy. and I suppose many high-end clerks have been thanked for selling someone wires that cost more than his speakers. I wonder how many people you have suckered into purchasing expensive wires and line conditioners, or overpriced amps and CD players. Uh, none. Yes, you are quite the moral gentleman, spud. I'll put my moral character up against yours any day of the week, fraud. Sure I can. Hell, I stayed away for several months. You obviously did not stay away, however. Again, your comments say more about you than they do about me. No, they don't. Oh, yes they do. Yes they do! Haw, haw, haw. So once again you speculate wildly without offering any reason or logic. I think all the newbies you are trying to impress anew have got you figured out by now. Yet another generation of RAOs have figured out how little you ultimately have to offer. Congrats! I wasn't caught plagiarizing. A claim of skill on your part. Your criminal abilities are profound. What criminal abilities, slick? I've got you so wound up that you're sounding hysterical here. I have no reason to leave. In fact, just a few days ago, I met with two other RAO regulars and listened to music all day and then had a wonderful meal. My friends are here. There's no reason for me to leave. RAO: the fool's paradise. Having friends and socializing with them is foolish. Is that what you're trying to say here? You, however, are reviled and pitied here. I wonder why you stay. To bug guys like you, spud, and to protect newbies from being buffaloed by you and your crew. And I am trying to prevent the newbies from doing the same with mentally ill Internet geeks such as you and Arny. You are addicted to the Internet, and you are addicted to RAO. The months you spent exiled from here were the worst times in your life. And you lurked here almost daily, because whenever your name was mentioned, there you were. Actually, if you check back you will see that I rarely came on board and posted anything. Trust me, if I had really been lurking I would also have been posting. When your name was mentioned, you did. Yeah, funny coincidence. However, if you check around a bit I have recently been posting quite a bit in places where my name did not show up at all. However, for the past few months before I got rolling again that did not happen. Do you really think I would have let you guys get away with spouting your standard claptrap if I had been scoping the threads for all those months? So you were lurking. Which means you are a liar. That was easy. I've discussed audio with you. I found you pedestrian, unoriginal, boorish, narrow-minded, and unable to elaborate your point without retreating to get more information from your keepers. I've even discussed your boorish behavior in print. See, I told you I was I was an audio celebrity in some circles. Actually, if I had the kind of attitude you clowns have I would start scoping for the printed material you mentioned and be ready to phone my lawyer. Actually, if you didn't suffer from severe short-term memory loss, you'd realize that I posted the link to the article just a few weeks ago, and you commented upon it. I rather think not. In any case, keep posting comments about me all over the place. My editors and publishers, bless their crafty little hearts, like that sort of thing. Your editors like knowing that you were caught plagiarizing? Let's have the names of these guys and ask them directly. I will bet any amount of money that won't agree. However, I relish you printing material about me, bad or good. Remember what I said about celebrity. Yes. "Read my books! Read my books!" Actually, two of my four books are kind of out of date (not to mention out of print), Due to low sales. although the material about amps, speakers, CD players, etc. is still relevant, and of course my jabs about goofy gimmicks like exotic wires, line conditioners, and other baloney, as well as about overpriced amps, players, and even speakers are still on the mark. So, the books, particularly The Home Theater Companion, would still be good used-book discount purchases. Corey Greenberg doesn't think so. On the other hand, my two record-review books are still OK (although the first one is long out of print), provided one can find the recordings reviewed. Obviously, some will no longer be available. Still, the comments hold, and of course I continue to review recordings for The Sensible Sound, and also write commentary columns and review some hardware. So, if one cannot read my books at least they should read my magazine materials. Come on - go read the article. It will help you regenerate some of those brain cells. No, it won't. Well, some people are simply beyond the cure, but I do suggest a regular diet of fish as a possible fix. Brain cells can't be regenerated, Clyde. Someone with your horrible memory should know that...or maybe not. Boon |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard said:
"George M. Middius" wrote: Brother Horace does his version of leading by example. you are a tricky and somewhat ignorant little tweako audio journalist or sales clerk who has a vested interest in baloney. spud, do me some damage. your invention, spud my work, spud "You would pull a lot more weight around here if you could graduate from name calling, profanity, and sometimes comical comments and start actually saying something intelligent about audio." Did I hurt your feelings when I posted that same comment about you a while back, Middius? Speaking of name-calling, Howard, I think that ever since you've returned, you've been rolling over like a ten-dollar whore for me. I really need more of a challenge to stay interested. Boon |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:29:12 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote: When you have limited means, like Howard, I guess you tend to take everything you can get, ethics be damned. Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Howard Ferstler Well, I'm sure the supply of inheritences will eventually run dry. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just
paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Howard Ferstler What are'accommodation rates'? |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"paul packer" wrote in message ... Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Howard Ferstler What are'accommodation rates'? |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
"paul packer" wrote in message ... Actually, my wife and I are very well off. Indeed, we just paid cash for two new cars, plus fifty grand in cash for assorted home upgrades. I rarely purchase audio gear at accommodation rates these days, because, to be truthful, I got all the gear on hand that I can use. Howard Ferstler What are'accommodation rates'? That means, if he writes a good review, he gets to keep the gear for free. |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Howard Ferstler said:
Here is my take on you clowns. I think that guys like you are doing more to undermine upscale audio (as opposed to tweako-freako audio) than any economic turndown - or even more than the explosion in home theater. Because of guys like you, few intellectually serious individuals get excited about high-end hardware. You have so wrecked the hobby with your nonsense about exotic wires, goofy accessories, overpriced amps and players, and ultra-megabuck speakers that people with any amount of sense have backed off and just gone to Best Buy and picked up some basic hardware. Show me where I promoted megabuck wires, amps, source components or even speakers. Besides, you're always harping on the fact that I can't afford multi channel gear but should do so, so who's the arrogant clown here forcing others to buy stuff they don't need? I suppose I should just let you idiots rant and rave here, since you are basically a fringe group. However, I find you so offensive as individuals that I simply have to drop in on occasion and rescue some of the newbies from the muck that you call information. You are your own worst enemy Howard. How corrupt? I mean, I sure as hell am not going to purchase a junk product, no matter how good the discount, and it would make no sense at all to give such a product a good review just because of a discount price. And I am doing the manufacturer a favor if I do purchase something, because he does not have to pay return shipping for a used component. Actually, I rather think that you are maybe a tad jealous, Biff. LOL!!! The only thing I'm jealous about is that you apparently have no winter where you live. -- Sander deWaal "SOA of a KT88? Sufficient." |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message ... Howard Ferstler said: Here is my take on you clowns. I think that guys like you are doing more to undermine upscale audio (as opposed to tweako-freako audio) than any economic turndown - or even more than the explosion in home theater. Because of guys like you, few intellectually serious individuals get excited about high-end hardware. Do you consider yourself an intellectually serious individual? Just wondering. How many people think audio is an intellectually serious hobby? You have so wrecked the hobby with your nonsense about exotic wires, goofy accessories, overpriced amps and players, and ultra-megabuck speakers and yet you want us to get 7 of them (isn't that the latest surround count? I kind of lost track). FWIW, I got a Pioneer VSX-D412 and it's great on TV and movies. I give it a 2 channel source and it just don't cut it in stereo or any of its surround options for music. ScottW |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul Packer said:
On 12 Sep 2004 04:51:12 GMT, (Marc Phillips) wrote: Paul Packer said: No, just disgusted that you are corrupt and try to mingle with us. You are CORRUPT!!! EVIL!!! Get it? Howard, get the hell outta here. You're a moral degenerate. Er...this wouldn't be hyperbole, would it? You haven't spent enough time with Howard, have you. Basically he is mentally ill. And that's not hyperbole, either. You mean he's corrupt, evil, morally degenerate AND mentally ill? This sounds bad for Howard. It was all pretty much over for Howard when he said that a recent hearing test revealed that he couldn't hear over 12 kHz. Boon |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sander said:
Howard Ferstler said: Here is my take on you clowns. I think that guys like you are doing more to undermine upscale audio (as opposed to tweako-freako audio) than any economic turndown - or even more than the explosion in home theater. Because of guys like you, few intellectually serious individuals get excited about high-end hardware. You have so wrecked the hobby with your nonsense about exotic wires, goofy accessories, overpriced amps and players, and ultra-megabuck speakers that people with any amount of sense have backed off and just gone to Best Buy and picked up some basic hardware. Show me where I promoted megabuck wires, amps, source components or even speakers. Besides, you're always harping on the fact that I can't afford multi channel gear but should do so, so who's the arrogant clown here forcing others to buy stuff they don't need? I suppose I should just let you idiots rant and rave here, since you are basically a fringe group. However, I find you so offensive as individuals that I simply have to drop in on occasion and rescue some of the newbies from the muck that you call information. You are your own worst enemy Howard. How corrupt? I mean, I sure as hell am not going to purchase a junk product, no matter how good the discount, and it would make no sense at all to give such a product a good review just because of a discount price. And I am doing the manufacturer a favor if I do purchase something, because he does not have to pay return shipping for a used component. Actually, I rather think that you are maybe a tad jealous, Biff. LOL!!! The only thing I'm jealous about is that you apparently have no winter where you live. I'd take a harsh winter over 150,000 rednecks any day. Boon |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sander said:
(Marc Phillips) said: I'd take a harsh winter over 150,000 rednecks any day. You live in California, you don't even know what winter is :-) Ever hear of Donner Pass? OTOH, I probably don't know what Fl. rednecks are like. Is Howard a fine representative of said species? You mean like his constant need to boast among his mental and social superiors? He's actually more white trash than redneck. A redneck can actually have money. Boon -- |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... Clyde Slick said: What are'accommodation rates'? That means, if he writes a good review, he gets to keep the gear for free. Not quite. According to Harold's own personal code of ethics, which he stated clearly and unambiguously right here on RAO, his only objective is to write a favorable review of the device in front of him. Since Harold has no conscience ("Plagiarism? So what?"), whether his slop is "good" doesn't matter to him. Good or bad, as long as it's favorable -- that's the ticket. sorry, of course I meant a favorable review rather than a quality review. |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... Sander deWaal said: I'd take a harsh winter over 150,000 rednecks any day. You live in California, you don't even know what winter is :-) OTOH, I probably don't know what Fl. rednecks are like. Is Howard a fine representative of said species? As Marc said elsewhere, Harold is a geek. Rednecks are aggressive, loud, ignorant, reckless, and often dangerous. A redneck would tear Clerkie limb from limb if it came to a showdown. Rednecks, note, do not spend their inheritances on twin Dodge Neons. And Harold has no use for a shotgun, nor for a pickup truck on which to mount it. Rednecks and cowboys account for over 50% of the underclass the Democrats profess to care for. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Marc Phillips" wrote in message ... over 150,000 rednecks any day. A redneck can actually have money. Until he gets his first divorce |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mr. Phillips wrote:
Paul Packer said: On 12 Sep 2004 04:51:12 GMT, (Marc Phillips) wrote: Paul Packer said: No, just disgusted that you are corrupt and try to mingle with us. You are CORRUPT!!! EVIL!!! Get it? Howard, get the hell outta here. You're a moral degenerate. Er...this wouldn't be hyperbole, would it? You haven't spent enough time with Howard, have you. Basically he is mentally ill. And that's not hyperbole, either. You mean he's corrupt, evil, morally degenerate AND mentally ill? This sounds bad for Howard. It was all pretty much over for Howard when he said that a recent hearing test revealed that he couldn't hear over 12 kHz. Boon It's a good thing he hasn't taken a polygraph test. He'd flunk that also, considering how many blatant falsehoods he's spewed on RAO. Bruce J. Richman |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| More on Equalizers from Ferstler | Audio Opinions | |||
| Ferstler Announces | Audio Opinions | |||
| Ferstler Readies and Article | Audio Opinions | |||
| Welcome Howard Ferstler | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
