Has anyone ever traced any independent comparative reviews of small
headphones which are suitable for use with an outdoors device such as an
iPod?

Not sure if noise canceling is the way to go to get ANY dynamic range at all
or if the statements by the manufacturers (such as Shure) about plugging the
ear obviates noise canceling technology. Sounds a bit simplistic to me,
especially as I occasionally use them in aircraft where they DO seem to be
useful

I have three pairs of phones: A Sony NC which gives no dynamic range or low
end, NoiseBusters which performs better than the others in all areas
principally because they are mediocre in all of them and Philips NC60 which
have OK high end but no low end at all and virtually no noise cancellation
(I even switched them with the manufacturer because I thought that they
weren't working at first until a second one did the same thing) Also they
have a slight tendency to fall out of the ear all the time which can be a
bit of a disadvantage

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...

Has anyone ever traced any independent comparative reviews
of small
headphones which are suitable for use with an outdoors
device such as an
iPod?

The smart, simple solution is in-ear-monitors such as those
sold by Shure and Etymotics

Not sure if noise canceling is the way to go to get ANY
dynamic range at all
or if the statements by the manufacturers (such as Shure)
about plugging the
ear obviates noise canceling technology. Sounds a bit
simplistic to me,
especially as I occasionally use them in aircraft where
they DO seem to be
useful

Active noise cancellation works better for speech than
music, it seems.

I have three pairs of phones: A Sony NC which gives no
dynamic range or low
end, NoiseBusters which performs better than the others in
all areas
principally because they are mediocre in all of them and
Philips NC60 which
have OK high end but no low end at all and virtually no
noise cancellation
(I even switched them with the manufacturer because I
thought that they
weren't working at first until a second one did the same
thing)

What was that we were saying about active noise cancellation
working better for speech than music? ;-)

Also they have a slight tendency to fall out of the ear
all the time which can be a
bit of a disadvantage

In-ear monitors, if fitted properly, give something like 20
dB supression of outside noises, and are a proven solution
for high quality music listening.

Not absulutely sure what "in-ear-monitors" are? I have seen a line drawing
of the Shure one and it does look like the Philips ones I have at the moment
which fall out continuously: This could of course be because the Philips
ones are too heavy? Especialy if all the noise cancelling technology has to
be built in to the head piece.

Ths Philips ones have two rims of convex cups around a central monitor. Is
there a (foam rubber?) noise blocking plug as well? Is the transducer in the
Philips just NBG? It does give quite good highs but that annoying switch
just seems to turn the volume down. Do I need an amplifier or will none of
these things work properly without one as suggested by headphones.com? This
is why I was looking for a comparative and independent review/opinion.


In-ear monitors, if fitted properly, give something like 20
dB supression of outside noises, and are a proven solution
for high quality music listening.

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...
Not absulutely sure what "in-ear-monitors" are? I have seen a line drawing
of the Shure one and it does look like the Philips ones I have at the
moment
which fall out continuously:

Musicians have to solve the problem on stage, where sound levels can be
high. I read that some in-ear monitors can be used with a custom mold.
Here's one user's experience:

http://www.drumdojo.com/reviews/iem.htm

here's one supplier

http://store.yahoo.com/earplugstore/cusfitearmol1.html

Tim

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...
Has anyone ever traced any independent comparative reviews of small
headphones which are suitable for use with an outdoors device such as an
iPod?

Not sure if noise canceling is the way to go to get ANY dynamic range at
all
or if the statements by the manufacturers (such as Shure) about plugging
the
ear obviates noise canceling technology. Sounds a bit simplistic to me,
especially as I occasionally use them in aircraft where they DO seem to be
useful

I've looked for noise cancelling solutions for trains, which, unlike jets,
have variable, impulsive noise.
I agree with the other posters that passive is the way to go.
Active noise cancellation is highly overrated, really ineffective, except
for stead, low frequency, droning noises.

In article , "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Active noise cancellation is highly overrated, really ineffective, except
for stead, low frequency, droning noises.

The only way I've been able to tolerate you still inhabiting my home after
over 50 years, by eliminating the overrated droning noises you make.

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS


Here's a summary of the sad history of my son Bob.

Unfortunately, Bob can NEVER admit he's been beaten, or he's wrong. He
spent 12 years in college trying to write a thesis that was totally without
any scientific merit. When Drexel got tired of his bleating about not
giving him a degree, he sued them. And even after he was proven IN COURT to
have been wrong, he insisted on appealing to the Supreme Court in
Washington.

And to this day, still believes that THEY are wrong, too!

So you're not going to change him, god knows his mother tried and it killed
her.

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS

PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein
--

Bob 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

But none of it is what he had imagined for himself.

"I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very
gnawing thing."

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...


Not absulutely sure what "in-ear-monitors" are?

Here are some pix:

http://vista-1041183.vista.com/store...75&item=370255

http://www.shure.com/psm/earphones/default.asp

http://www.etymotic.com/

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...51950?v=glance

I have seen a line drawing
of the Shure one and it does look like the Philips ones I
have at the moment
which fall out continuously: This could of course be
because the Philips
ones are too heavy?

These ones?

http://www.argos.co.uk/webapp/wcs/st...clickfrom=name


An IEM is supposed to have a tip that fits relatively
tightly into the ear canal. If properly fitted (most
earphones come with a range of tip sizes) they don't fall
out.

Do I need an amplifier or will none of
these things work properly without one as suggested by
headphones.com?

Most people use earphones with just the digital player. If
your hearing is poor, or your player puts out a weak signal,
or you like music vary loud, then an amplifier can help.
Also, there are some effects related to the acoustics of
your head that some more complex headphone amplifiers
address. If you can't adapt to headphone listening, they can
help.

These ones?


http://www.argos.co.uk/webapp/wcs/st...clickfrom=name

No, the ones I have are shown at
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...sPageName=WDVW
and seem to have active and passive noise cancelling technology (unless that
is an exaggeration for something which doesnt work?)


They do look suspiciously like the ones which work by plugging rather than
by listening and counteracting. Which makes me wonder what the on off switch
is for (it doesnt actually do anything which is odd as the reviews I read
before purchase said that they work quite well).

Here, this is really baffling:
http://www2.interactivereviews.com/p...61IYJC#reviews

These people found exactly what I found, that some people love them and have
terrific noise reduction whereas others have no noise reduction whatsoever

How do you get CNET or someone supposedly reliable to do a review on them?

Is it possible that TWO pairs just dont work?

"Sylvan Morein" wrote in message
rdnews.com...
In article , "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Active noise cancellation is highly overrated, really ineffective,
except
for stead, low frequency, droning noises.

The only way I've been able to tolerate you still inhabiting my home after
over 50 years, by eliminating the overrated droning noises you make.

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS

Forgery by Brian L. McCarty.
Brian is upset because he has been warned that the crackdown on his scams,
http://www.worldjazz.com and http://www.coralseastudios.com, will never end.
Remember, Brian, if we detect any signs of forward motion in these scams,
the appropriate heads of state will be informed.

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...
Here, this is really baffling:
http://www2.interactivereviews.com/p...61IYJC#reviews

These people found exactly what I found, that some people love them and
have
terrific noise reduction whereas others have no noise reduction whatsoever

How do you get CNET or someone supposedly reliable to do a review on them?

Is it possible that TWO pairs just dont work?


First, you say they fall out. That means they are not fitting properly,
which means you will be losing bass response. As an experiment, try fitting
them tightly in your ears, and then place your hands over your ears to try
to ensure a good seal. If the bass response improves markedly, then you
have a sealing problem.

Secondly, noise cancelling is ( I should think) pretty simple. You use a
microphone to capture external sound, amplify it, and feed it to the
earpieces *out of phase* with the external sound. The trick is to adjust
the out-of-phase signal at the ear so it's the same loudness as the external
sound itself - and so it will depend on the earpieces attenuating the
external signal by a known amount. If you don't have a good seal, it won't
work, because the external sound arriving at the ear will be louder than the
noise-cancelling system was expecting.

Tim






..

and seem to have active and passive noise cancelling technology (unless that
is an exaggeration for something which doesnt work?)

Passive noise cancelling: They get in the way of other sounds. Most
headphones will do that to some degree, some more and some less.

Active is the "listen and counteract" thing. That works for some sounds
(machinery) better than others. I have a friend who was an early adopter
of Bose's entry in that field and loves it; my experiments with cheaper
knock-offs have been in conclusive (they definitely make a random-noise
environment such as a shopping mall sound _different_ but I'm not
convinced they actually make it less distracting).

Haven't checked the eBay link so I have no opinion about that particular
unit.

Well the general climate of opinion seems to be that EITHER they are
impossibly difficult to fit into the ear properly OR that they are too heavy
to stay in for longer than a few seconds

No one has given an opinion on quality yet: The highs and mid range seems to
be OK but they might be a bit lacking in bass OR possibly the iPod Mini
doesnt put out enough to drive the bass drivers in there?

Haven't checked the eBay link so I have no opinion about that particular
unit.

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message
...

Well the general climate of opinion seems to be that
EITHER they are
impossibly difficult to fit into the ear properly OR that
they are too heavy
to stay in for longer than a few seconds

I already have about a quart of IEMs in a gallon plastic
bag, and some of them sound pretty darn good to me. So, I'm
trying very hard not to buy any more. I just bought a pair
of Panasonic IEMs because I ended up in Manhattan for 3 days
with my Nomad3 and darn it, no 'phones. Dummm! I'm not
going to buy a pair of the Philips IEMs we've been
discussing just to find out what is wrong with them. I'm
promising myself that! ;-)

As a rule IEMs aren't inherently heavy or hard to fit. Fit
is probably the most variable part of the sound quality and
comfort equation. Basically, moderately tight is good, very
loose is bad. Some people get along with this better than
others. If you can learn to live with it, so much the
better.

No one has given an opinion on quality yet: The highs and
mid range seems to
be OK but they might be a bit lacking in bass

This is either a design problem or a problem with fit. Some
IEMs, particularly the cheap ones, are light on bass.
However, even the good IEMs can be light on bass if the tips
don't fit the ear tightly enough.


OR possibly the iPod Mini
doesnt put out enough to drive the bass drivers in there?

There's no bass driver in low and mid-price IEMs. They do
it all with one itty-bitty driver. The most common symptom
of a a digital player that can't handle the load of the IEM
is for the sound to completely cut out at times. This
symptom seems to be very infrequently reported with Shure
IEMs, and even less frequently with competitive units.

I try a lot of earphone from different manufacturer but nothing was ok with
my ear morphology. I have a type of ears that simply can't hold an earphone.
So i search the web and found ET6 earphone plug. I find it expensive so i
continue my search and found that Radio Shack was selling a very similar
product with silicone plug i bought those and voila the earphone stick
inside the ear conduit. The sound is very good and i can walk no problema. I
even can listen radio ear with earphone on the pillow without disconfort. So
they are my favorite earphones that i use with my new iRiver 799 1Gig Mp3
Player.
Great combinaison
JP

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com a écrit dans le message de news:
...
Has anyone ever traced any independent comparative reviews of small
headphones which are suitable for use with an outdoors device such as an
iPod?

Not sure if noise canceling is the way to go to get ANY dynamic range at
all
or if the statements by the manufacturers (such as Shure) about plugging
the
ear obviates noise canceling technology. Sounds a bit simplistic to me,
especially as I occasionally use them in aircraft where they DO seem to be
useful

I have three pairs of phones: A Sony NC which gives no dynamic range or
low
end, NoiseBusters which performs better than the others in all areas
principally because they are mediocre in all of them and Philips NC60
which
have OK high end but no low end at all and virtually no noise cancellation
(I even switched them with the manufacturer because I thought that they
weren't working at first until a second one did the same thing) Also they
have a slight tendency to fall out of the ear all the time which can be a
bit of a disadvantage

In article , "Robert Morein"
wrote:

Active noise cancellation is highly overrated, really ineffective, except
for stead, low frequency, droning noises.

The only way I've been able to tolerate you still inhabiting my home after
over 50 years, by eliminating the overrated droning noises you make.

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS


Here's a summary of the sad history of my son Bob.

Unfortunately, Bob can NEVER admit he's been beaten, or he's wrong. He
spent 12 years in college trying to write a thesis that was totally without
any scientific merit. When Drexel got tired of his bleating about not
giving him a degree, he sued them. And even after he was proven IN COURT to
have been wrong, he insisted on appealing to the Supreme Court in
Washington.

And to this day, still believes that THEY are wrong, too!

So you're not going to change him, god knows his mother tried and it killed
her.

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS

PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein
--

Bob 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

But none of it is what he had imagined for himself.

"I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very
gnawing thing."

[news.rcn.com]

SORRY TO POST OT BUT FOR SOME REASON MY EMAIL CLIENT WONT LET ME POST NEW
POSTINGS ON THIS FORUM

PROBLEM: Like high end sounds but want to listen to LPs occasionally on my
iPod or similar.

Have a Linn/Dyanvector Ruby/Fidelix combination with a Berning TF-10 tube
pre-amp which has the capacitors going all over the circuit board. it has
already been to Berning to replace once and they are going again.
Introduces low end crackling when turned on for more than a few hours as
they presumably warm up, leak and overheat. Haven't decided what to replace
it with yet. (no great rush as my Citation 11 is still awaiting return from
repairers as is my MR71 which was fully rebuilt to the highest standards and
then some cowboy started playing around with the stringing and managed to
stop it working altogether)

Want to put LPs onto my iPod: At first, '30s jazz, old Maggie Teyte
recordings, then I might get a bit more adventurous.

There used to be a product called Pinnacle Clean Plus which includes a
phono-pre-amp to put at the end of my pre-pre amp. It has been discontinued,
no one knows why (poss: Doesn't work with some new patch to XP, such as
SP2?)

Is there an alternative with which I wont be too disappointed? Does anyone
in the high end arena have any experience with this product or with ripping
LPs in an environment like this without spending a fortune on it?

[Arny Krueger]

"news.rcn.com" news.rnc.com wrote in message


There used to be a product called Pinnacle Clean Plus
which includes a phono-pre-amp to put at the end of my
pre-pre amp. It has been discontinued, no one knows why
(poss: Doesn't work with some new patch to XP, such as
SP2?)
Is there an alternative with which I wont be too
disappointed? Does anyone in the high end arena have any
experience with this product or with ripping LPs in an
environment like this without spending a fortune on it?

This looks like a device with some promise:

http://www.zzounds.com/item--ARTUSBMICROPRE

[Jim]

news.rcn.com wrote:
SORRY TO POST OT BUT FOR SOME REASON MY EMAIL CLIENT WONT LET ME POST NEW
POSTINGS ON THIS FORUM

PROBLEM: Like high end sounds but want to listen to LPs occasionally on my
iPod or similar.

Have a Linn/Dyanvector Ruby/Fidelix combination with a Berning TF-10 tube
pre-amp which has the capacitors going all over the circuit board. it has
already been to Berning to replace once and they are going again.
Introduces low end crackling when turned on for more than a few hours as
they presumably warm up, leak and overheat.

If they overheat they need better cooling. This is also the cheapest
fix. A car parts store will have a remote reading digital thermometer,
they work well. A little work with some aluminum sheet will probably do
the job if you are at all handy with tools. Or, somewhere I've seen
some cooling "collars" for tubes.

Haven't decided what to replace
it with yet. (no great rush as my Citation 11 is still awaiting return from
repairers as is my MR71 which was fully rebuilt to the highest standards and
then some cowboy started playing around with the stringing and managed to
stop it working altogether)

Want to put LPs onto my iPod: At first, '30s jazz, old Maggie Teyte
recordings, then I might get a bit more adventurous.

There used to be a product called Pinnacle Clean Plus which includes a
phono-pre-amp to put at the end of my pre-pre amp. It has been discontinued,
no one knows why (poss: Doesn't work with some new patch to XP, such as
SP2?)

Is there an alternative with which I wont be too disappointed? Does anyone
in the high end arena have any experience with this product or with ripping
LPs in an environment like this without spending a fortune on it?