Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.

" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq? :-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.

More irony.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq? :-)


They seem to do better with things that aren't political.
Smart ass. :-)

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.
ABX has been proven worthless, by an argument I gave in another thread.

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title, "A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq? :-)


They seem to do better with things that aren't political.
Smart ass. :-)

Dumb ass.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.
ABX has been proven worthless, by an argument I gave in another thread.

So the question remains, if ABX is worthless, why do so many people doing
audio research, rely on it?

Reason dictates that it is not worthless, but you are.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq? :-)


They seem to do better with things that aren't political.
Smart ass. :-)

Dumb ass.

Shouldn't there be a message to go along with your sig.

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.
ABX has been proven worthless, by an argument I gave in another thread.

So the question remains, if ABX is worthless, why do so many people doing
audio research, rely on it?

Reason dictates that it is not worthless, but you are.

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq? :-)


They seem to do better with things that aren't political.
Smart ass. :-)

Dumb ass.

Shouldn't there be a message to go along with your sig.

It is not a signature line, Mikey. It is a comment about you.

Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles swoop down and carry
him off to their nest high above the Pacific ocean. From that vantage
point, he can dine sumptuously on worms and grubs, and never again worry
about the ineffable "differences" he's incapable of perceiving.

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

At the very least, he could learn which end of a fork to climb on.

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles swoop down and carry
him off to their nest high above the Pacific ocean. From that vantage
point, he can dine sumptuously on worms and grubs, and never again worry
about the ineffable "differences" he's incapable of perceiving.

There are dumpsters with bug infestations. Dumpster-diving would be a more
attainable goal.

On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 15:49:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how
much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.
ABX has been proven worthless, by an argument I gave in another thread.

So the question remains, if ABX is worthless, why do so many people doing
audio research, rely on it?

Reason dictates that it is not worthless, but you are.

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles ...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever I
choose.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

At the very least, he could learn which end of a fork to climb on.

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles swoop down and carry
him off to their nest high above the Pacific ocean. From that vantage
point, he can dine sumptuously on worms and grubs, and never again worry
about the ineffable "differences" he's incapable of perceiving.

There are dumpsters with bug infestations. Dumpster-diving would be a more
attainable goal.

Wow, you are a great writer. No wonder you're a successful screen writer.
Oh wait, that's not you.
Never mind.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
" said:

Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.



Is that BBC report as reliable as their documentaries about Iraq?
:-)


They seem to do better with things that aren't political.
Smart ass. :-)

Dumb ass.

Shouldn't there be a message to go along with your sig.

It is not a signature line, Mikey. It is a comment about you.

So you're back to being a liar as well as a fool.

Yawn.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 15:49:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles ...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever I
choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 15:49:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how
much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

But that would changing the meaning.
Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the the ABX protocol is
indicative of the fact that you are not only unscientific, but in serious
denial.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles ...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever I
choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

An amp, pream/tuner, CD player, cassette deck, DVD player, non-audiophile
approved turntable, electronic xover, 2 sattelite speakers and a subwoofer,
outboard Surround processor, and a comfy chair.

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on
formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles ...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever I
choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

An amp, pream/tuner, CD player, cassette deck, DVD player, non-audiophile
approved turntable, electronic xover, 2 sattelite speakers and a
subwoofer, outboard Surround processor, and a comfy chair.

Which particlar ones, dumbass.
You're the one telling us its 'great'

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
news

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on
formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles ...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever I
choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

An amp, pream/tuner, CD player, cassette deck, DVD player, non-audiophile
approved turntable, electronic xover, 2 sattelite speakers and a
subwoofer, outboard Surround processor, and a comfy chair.

Which particlar ones, dumbass.

Why are you responding to Morein?

You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it would
open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming them.
Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat) and the CD
player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are both recognized
as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
news

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on
formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles
...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever
I choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

An amp, pream/tuner, CD player, cassette deck, DVD player,
non-audiophile approved turntable, electronic xover, 2 sattelite
speakers and a subwoofer, outboard Surround processor, and a comfy
chair.

Which particlar ones, dumbass.

Why are you responding to Morein?

You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


I listened to a Rotel cd player a number of years back. Stereophile
reviewers loved it. I thought it was unlistenable.
I heard an Acoustat amp once, not under ideal conditions
in a store. It was ok, I have heard worse and I have heard better.

" wrote in message
link.net...


You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


Why did you spend so much, mass market cd players and
amps are just as good, you know. Looks like
you got hoodwinked, to me.

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 05:54:16 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

I didn't mean that the sentence made sense or was well written, just
that Mike is trying to disprove your poor opinion of him, and is thus
interested in "self improvement", a sure spur to evolutionary
progress. I was just hoping you might acknowledge his efforts.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 05:54:16 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

I didn't mean that the sentence made sense or was well written, just
that Mike is trying to disprove your poor opinion of him, and is thus
interested in "self improvement", a sure spur to evolutionary
progress. I was just hoping you might acknowledge his efforts.

Paul, r.a.o. is not a place that rewards generosity of spirit. If I throw
the cur a bone, it will bite me. However, out of respect for you,
Mikey, congratulations on the improvement in self expression. I commend to
you, for further improvement, the classic "Elements of Style", by William
Strunk.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...


You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


Why did you spend so much, mass market cd players and
amps are just as good, you know. Looks like
you got hoodwinked, to me.

Mikey is a complete hypocrite. Not long ago, he stated that he was getting
rid of the Acoustat. Now he keeps it, while still in denial about the crappy
QSC amp he can't or won't ditch.

Isn't that something? Next we'll discover that Arny listens to a Krell,
while boosting QSC to other people.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
news

" wrote in message
link.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our
hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on
formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

Just because you come from a family of
parasites......................

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles
...................


I'm content now, George.


I have a great hi-fi, and I know the best ways to improve it whenever
I choose.


Tell us all about your great hifi
What you got??

An amp, pream/tuner, CD player, cassette deck, DVD player,
non-audiophile approved turntable, electronic xover, 2 sattelite
speakers and a subwoofer, outboard Surround processor, and a comfy
chair.

Which particlar ones, dumbass.

Why are you responding to Morein?

You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


I listened to a Rotel cd player a number of years back. Stereophile
reviewers loved it. I thought it was unlistenable.
And you are both wrong, it just sounds like any othe CD player.

I heard an Acoustat amp once, not under ideal conditions
in a store. It was ok, I have heard worse and I have heard better.
Yet in reality, it's just another amp that is well made and sounds like
every other well made amp.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...


You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


Why did you spend so much, mass market cd players and
amps are just as good, you know. Looks like
you got hoodwinked, to me.

The amp was second hand and as affordable as any other amp with that much
power.
The CD player was becuase I knew of Rotel's build quality form prior
experience.

I now have 3 DVD players 2 of which were free and CD's sound exactly the
same on all 3.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...


You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


Why did you spend so much, mass market cd players and
amps are just as good, you know. Looks like
you got hoodwinked, to me.

Mikey is a complete hypocrite. Not long ago, he stated that he was getting
rid of the Acoustat. Now he keeps it, while still in denial about the
crappy
QSC amp he can't or won't ditch.

The QSC just needed a couple filter caps, so repair is a perfectly
reasonable option.
The only one in denail about the QSC amps is you, until you do a DBT to
prove it sounds different from another amp of your shoice, you can't
reasonably say it sounds bad. But then you have proven that you are not
reasonable.

Isn't that something? Next we'll discover that Arny listens to a Krell,
while boosting QSC to other people.

If you could get a Krell for the price of a Yamaha receiver, would you?
Would that make you a hypocrite, or just someone who took advantage of a
good price on a well made piece of gear?

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 05:54:16 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

I didn't mean that the sentence made sense or was well written, just
that Mike is trying to disprove your poor opinion of him, and is thus
interested in "self improvement", a sure spur to evolutionary
progress. I was just hoping you might acknowledge his efforts.

Wrong, I am not trying to prove anything, my vocabulary is fine, my typing
and forgetfulness bout spell check is another problem entirely.

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...


You're the one telling us its 'great'

It is. If I told you all the brand names, no matter what they are, it
would open up a whole new set of attacks, so there's no point in naming
them. Some of it has already been mentioned, namely the amp, (Acoustat)
and the CD player (Rotel), so there's no way to hide them, and they are
both recognized as very good by any subjectivist rag you care to read.


Why did you spend so much, mass market cd players and
amps are just as good, you know. Looks like
you got hoodwinked, to me.

The amp was second hand and as affordable as any other amp with that much
power.
The CD player was becuase I knew of Rotel's build quality form prior
experience.

I now have 3 DVD players 2 of which were free and CD's sound exactly the
same on all 3.

If you can't tell the difference between an Acoustat and a QSC amp, you have
a very serious hearing problem.

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 05:54:16 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

I didn't mean that the sentence made sense or was well written, just
that Mike is trying to disprove your poor opinion of him, and is thus
interested in "self improvement", a sure spur to evolutionary
progress. I was just hoping you might acknowledge his efforts.

Wrong, I am not trying to prove anything, my vocabulary is fine, my typing
and forgetfulness bout spell check is another problem entirely.

Mikey, your vocabulary is small. Your grammar is poor. And yes, your
spelling is also poor, but it is the least of your problems. You cannot
blame your poor writing on forgetfulness. Writing exhibits the quality of
the mind. You have shown us nothing.

" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

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


Robert Morein said:

ABX is fine for reseach on Hindi phonemes, codecs, and the like.
For hifi, we have something much better: our brains, and our hearts.

Talking like that to the Bug Eater is akin to lecturing snails on
formal
dining etiquette -- a complete waste of time.

At the very least, he could learn which end of a fork to climb on.

Mickey will only be content when a flock of eagles swoop down and carry
him off to their nest high above the Pacific ocean. From that vantage
point, he can dine sumptuously on worms and grubs, and never again
worry
about the ineffable "differences" he's incapable of perceiving.

There are dumpsters with bug infestations. Dumpster-diving would be a
more
attainable goal.

Wow, you are a great writer.
Mikey, George did most of the writing, and it's good.

" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 05:54:16 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

I didn't mean that the sentence made sense or was well written, just
that Mike is trying to disprove your poor opinion of him, and is thus
interested in "self improvement", a sure spur to evolutionary
progress. I was just hoping you might acknowledge his efforts.

Wrong, I am not trying to prove anything, my vocabulary is fine, my typing
and forgetfulness bout spell check is another problem entirely.

" wrote in message
hlink.net...



Wrong, I am not trying to prove anything, my vocabulary is fine, my typing
and forgetfulness bout spell check is another problem entirely.


Wrong eye hem knot tying two prove anything, mien vocabulary is feign, my
tie ping and forgetfulness bout spill Czech king is another problem

" said:

The QSC just needed a couple filter caps, so repair is a perfectly
reasonable option.


Huh? How old is that amp?
Providing proper ventilation and no voltage surges, 'lytics should
survive at least 10 years before problems may be expected.

If you can get them, try BHC components electros, they have a good rep
for longevity (both with me and some other amp builders).
While you're at it, select a value and voltage that's a tad higher
than specified.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005