Mickey, you were very mean to me the other day when you called me a "vile
pig". Don't you know that kind of talk can hurt people's feelings? It's a
good thing I know what you are -- otherwise I might have been offended at
your outburst. In consequence of your vicious slanders, I'm now going to
explain my characterizations of you and your obnoxious behavior. You
probably won't understand any of this, so maybe you should just skip my
post and go on to your customary, if futile, search for "facts".

"Mikey likes it." Your old handle -- remember that? We knew what you
meant, Mr. Bug Eater.

"Arnii Krooger never causes trouble." A paraphrase, but it's an accurate
representation. This claim of yours raises two possibilities in the minds
of not-crazy people: either (a) you're crazy, or (b) you're a pathological
liar and a blindered ideologue.

"I base my decisions on facts." You've said something like this dozens of
times. You say it in the context of how people choose their audio
equipment. You carry on about how people shouldn't trust their senses and
emotions. This ranting of yours reinforces (a) above -- i.e. you're crazy.

You are a failed audio salesperson and a failed audio manufacturer. "What,
me bitter?" should be tattooed on your forehead.

You're very dumb. Without taking ridiculous guesses out of malice at your
IQ, a la Mr. ****, I will venture to say that your native intelligence,
however great or meager it might be, does not exert sufficient influence
over your behavior. So although it's possible you scored 130 on an IQ
test, for you to hold up that moment as a measure of your abilities kind
of misses the point, if you know what I mean.

Your allotment of self-awareness seems to have gone south, evaporated, or
been consumed by the inferno of rage and envy that envelops you. You are
nearly as much a hypocrite as the Krooborg, but you're unable to perceive
it. Really, Mickey, you are quite pathetic.

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



Mickey, you were very mean to me the other day when you called me a "vile
pig". Don't you know that kind of talk can hurt people's feelings?

But not yours, since you're not a person.

It's a
good thing I know what you are -- otherwise I might have been offended at
your outburst. In consequence of your vicious slanders, I'm now going to
explain my characterizations of you and your obnoxious behavior. You
probably won't understand any of this, so maybe you should just skip my
post and go on to your customary, if futile, search for "facts".

"Mikey likes it." Your old handle -- remember that? We knew what you
meant, Mr. Bug Eater.

Oh really? Tell me then, I'd love to see your interpretation of something
that as usual, you have no clue on.


"Arnii Krooger never causes trouble." A paraphrase, but it's an accurate
representation.

No it's not, but that's to be expected.

This claim of yours raises two possibilities in the minds
of not-crazy people: either (a) you're crazy, or (b) you're a pathological
liar and a blindered ideologue.


Or you are.

"I base my decisions on facts." You've said something like this dozens of
times. You say it in the context of how people choose their audio
equipment. You carry on about how people shouldn't trust their senses and
emotions. This ranting of yours reinforces (a) above -- i.e. you're crazy.

It's crazy to base your buying decisons on the facts, OK got it.


You are a failed audio salesperson and a failed audio manufacturer. "What,
me bitter?" should be tattooed on your forehead.


I didn't fail at it, I just got sick of it. Sales is not a field I feel
good about in general, and while I loved being around all the equipment, I
didn't like the restrictions. Having to sell whatever had the best spiffs,
irrespective of being the best for a given need.

You're very dumb. Without taking ridiculous guesses out of malice at your
IQ, a la Mr. ****, I will venture to say that your native intelligence,
however great or meager it might be, does not exert sufficient influence
over your behavior. So although it's possible you scored 130 on an IQ
test, for you to hold up that moment as a measure of your abilities kind
of misses the point, if you know what I mean.

Your allotment of self-awareness seems to have gone south, evaporated, or
been consumed by the inferno of rage and envy that envelops you. You are
nearly as much a hypocrite as the Krooborg, but you're unable to perceive
it. Really, Mickey, you are quite pathetic.


Coming from the most despicable pile of dung on RAO or usenet in general,
you can probably guess at how much sleep I will lose over your comments
George.

Let's look at your behavior.
You don't talk about audio.
You never actually debate anybody on anything, you simply proclaim.
You constantly lie and claim it to be satire, another lie.
You could simply not read the words of people that seem to bother you so
much, yet you continue to read them and then respond with some of the most
despicable, vile, and repulsive bilge it has ever been my displeasure to
read, so for the most part I don't read much of what you post.
If I'm so inferior, why do you bother with me at all?
How empty is your life that you feel the need to belittle me or any of the
other people here.

wrote in message
link.net...

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



Mickey, you were very mean to me the other day when you called me a "vile
pig". Don't you know that kind of talk can hurt people's feelings?

But not yours, since you're not a person.

Mikey, Dear, dear Mikey Mckelviphibian, you are not even warm blooded. Your
damp skin and spiny fins identify you as a primitive life form, devoted to
regurgitating bits of knowledge that have been horribly distorted in the
stomach of Arny Krueger.

A chorus of "duh! duh! duh!" seems to follow Mickey everywhere.

You never actually debate anybody on anything,

You don't "debate" either.

you simply proclaim.

You excel at making a fool of yourself, but unfortunately you're too stupid
to realize how foolish you are.

wrote in message
link.net...

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

[snip]

Let's look at your behavior.
You don't talk about audio.
You never actually debate anybody on anything, you simply proclaim.
[snip idiocy]
Mikey, George's remarks, as they are about your personality, are defacto
subjective, and therefore require no qualification.

You, on the other hand, constantly bore this group with repetitive slavish
remarks about ABX, and the sanctity of Arny Krueger, who should have a sex
change, since you obviously regard him as the Holy Mother of audio.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want in audio. As for this group,
it just depends upon how you put it across, and how often. Stop trying to
discredit everybody you disagree with. Stop posting link after link about
how good ABX is for hearing research, and cell phone codecs. Stop
proclaiming that Floyd This and Harry That are audio Gods, just because they
have nice jobs working for an audio conglomerate. Try to understand that
it's the attitude, not ABX, that we find objectionable.

Unless, of course, you come here to fight. Some people do that. But bear in
mind that it is an eternal battle. Neither you, nor your opponents, can
"win". You can't gain popularity; neither can we. There is no goal here that
is in itself worthwhile. This is not the land of prophets and oracles. The
best you can do is a good time. The worst you can do is a waste of time, if
you mistakenly think you can do more. Arny, who you admire so much, is
having a bad time, either because he wants a bad time, or because he is
doesn't understand that this is a landscape that will never change.

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


A chorus of "duh! duh! duh!" seems to follow Mickey everywhere.

You never actually debate anybody on anything,

You don't "debate" either.

you simply proclaim.

You excel at making a fool of yourself, but unfortunately you're too
stupid
to realize how foolish you are.

Being the reverse barometer you are, I guess I should thank you for telling
me I'm a genius.

Or do you really expect that people should admire your wit for using words
like Kroobitch?

You're a disgusting pig of a person, and completely repusive in every way
and nearly everything you say here. If you think you are hurting my
feelings or going to drive me away from here and stop me from telling the
truth as I see it, you are blind as well as repulsive.

wrote in message
hlink.net...

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
as I see it, blah, blah, blah




"At least" its a start.

Clyde Slick said:

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
as I see it, blah, blah, blah

"At least" its a start.

Be sure not to say "oink" to Mickey. That sound gets him all hot and
bothered, and it never ends well.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
hlink.net...

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
as I see it, blah, blah, blah




"At least" its a start.

Ah, my own Greek chorus.

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


Clyde Slick said:

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
as I see it, blah, blah, blah

"At least" its a start.

Be sure not to say "oink" to Mickey. That sound gets him all hot and
bothered, and it never ends well.



Leave out of your wierd fantasy.

Socky wrote:
wrote in message
link.net...

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

[snip]

Let's look at your behavior.
You don't talk about audio.
You never actually debate anybody on anything, you simply proclaim.
[snip idiocy]
Mikey, George's remarks, as they are about your personality, are defacto
subjective, and therefore require no qualification.

You, on the other hand, constantly bore this group with repetitive slavish
remarks about ABX, and the sanctity of Arny Krueger, who should have a sex
change, since you obviously regard him as the Holy Mother of audio.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want in audio. As for this group,
it just depends upon how you put it across, and how often. Stop trying to
discredit everybody you disagree with. Stop posting link after link about
how good ABX is for hearing research, and cell phone codecs. Stop
proclaiming that Floyd This and Harry That are audio Gods, just because they
have nice jobs working for an audio conglomerate. Try to understand that
it's the attitude, not ABX, that we find objectionable.

Unless, of course, you come here to fight. Some people do that. But bear in
mind that it is an eternal battle. Neither you, nor your opponents, can
"win". You can't gain popularity; neither can we. There is no goal here that
is in itself worthwhile. This is not the land of prophets and oracles. The
best you can do is a good time. The worst you can do is a waste of time, if
you mistakenly think you can do more. Arny, who you admire so much, is
having a bad time, either because he wants a bad time, or because he is
doesn't understand that this is a landscape that will never change.

Like you I'm interested in the Nyob phenomenon. He says that he is a
crusader for truth and facts but with such friends truth needs no
enemies and facts change from day to day as convenient.

His truth goes like this:
9am. The day opens at the typewriter:

"ABX is great for unbiased uncovering of subtle/small differences
between components"

Than why don't you use it?

I don't need to. I KNOW how to choose my components.

What about me and Tom and Fred?

Don't you know that everybody needs an unbiased, matched level test?

But you just said...

You lying again?

10 am.
You chose your components sighted and that eg' "Dynaudio are simply
the best speakers I ever heard"
Didn't you say ""Sighted impressions are all flawed."

It is different when I say it. All others, especially the Stereophile
critics are liars. Liars need ABX.

Why ABX? It has never been shown to be a good tool for showing
differences between audio components.

You too ARE a LIAR. Its been shown MANY times to be one of the best if
not the best.

Please give me just a few addresses/refernces to those showings. I'd
like to go to a library and look them up. Because last time I had
looked all the panels using ABX found all the comparable components to
sound the same.

Type "ABX" into the web the way I did and you'll get hundreds of
green printings mentioning ABX. The way I did. You can post those reams
of titles (no quotes from the contents) the way I did. Next you can say
that nearly everybody uses it in research into nearly anything. Like
the Nokia for cell-phones and the hearing aid manufacturers not to
mention the BBC., the H-K and all those others.

12 midday:

"I did what you told me. BBC had hundreds of long papers listed. They
did not mention ABX, not once.
H-K did not use ABX in any of their numerous published white papers
and specifically not for comparing loudspeakers.

Nokia advertises their cellphones but have nothing to say about using
ABX to uncover subtle differences between audio components.
As for hearing aids I did not know which ones of them did audio
component comparisons. Could you possibly be more specific: and give
me: journal, author date. Or was it all a special secret communication
for your ears only from hearing aids people and all those other
nameless researchers that you can not disclose?

"Its not my fault that you're too lazy to do your own research. I
can only point you the right way".

1pm

"I looked closely through the BBC files. Still no ABX."

Oops that was an error. ABX Shmaybx. They used single blind test once,
didn't they?. Blind tests are great. ABX is just a... hmm, let's
see a subsidiary, no a subchapter, no a subtext- yes I got the right
word - it is a subtext of DBTs. From now on when I mean ABX I say DBT
and vice-versa. That's science for you.

So where does that leave poor Arny's invention?

He'll have to fight his own battles. I have enough problems. Remember
whenever they tell you ABX has not been shown to work just answer
"DBT, and add "a subtext" then " all the researchers..." That
will floor them.

2pm.

"They say that if you have a weapon for uncovering subtle differences
you should have no problem using it to identify correctly, with
statistical validity different comparable cartridges and loudspeakers.
People are challenging you to a bet"

I don't want to hear clicks on the LP. ever again"

You say nothing about a bet for identifying loudspeakers. Surely quite
a few would spare a hundred just to shut you up

Hmm, you know.. technical difficulties. That kind of thing. I'll have
to think about it.. what?

4pm.

"One Mirabel complains that where he enthusiastically endorses the
use of DBTs for selecting loudspeakers you said to Sean Olive that "a
person" was against that use. Sean Olive then emailed you his
disagreement with that person's" silliness. Whereupon you proceeded
to post Sean Olive's condemnation of that "person's" views in
the forum under the heading: "Guess what Sean Olive had to say about
Ludovic's remarks" Except he said it about your forgery not
"Ludovic's remarks"
Mirabel thought it was disgusting to forge the exact opposite of what
he had said but no worse than he expected of you. He says intellectual
honesty is a foreign country where you live."

Let him say what he wants. I achieved my aim didn't I? Tell them I
just "slightly paraphrased" Mirabel's views. Who will remember in
two weeks time who said what to whom. That's the way to play the
game.

5pm:
So what makes NYOB run? Why does he post umpteen times per day, twists,
lies and forges,
At last there is an answer.
He used to be an audio salesman.
NYOB explains
"I didn't fail at it, I just got sick of it. Sales is not a field I
feel
good about in general, and while I loved being around all the
equipment, I
didn't like the restrictions. Having to sell whatever had the best
spiffs,
irrespective of being the best for a given need...."
As a salesman he lied through his teeth every day to sell what he knew
wasn't worth a dime. Lying became a second nature- but somewhere deep
down he felt uneasy cheating people out of their money from morning
till evening.
Nowadays he can twist, lie and forge in defence of what he truly
believes in.
He took a giant leap into another ethical dimension and believe it or
not he feels great about it
Ludovic Mirabel

"Socky" wrote in message


Arny, who you admire so
much, is having a bad time, either because he wants a bad
time, or because he is doesn't understand that this is a
landscape that will never change.

Wrong on all counts, Socky. (that's got to be as in
sockpuppet, right).

I'm not having a bad time, I'm having fun feeding Ipecac to
the *animals*.

Look at how steamed Morein is - if he wasn't confined he'd
be on my door step waiting to punch me out.

I know that this place won't change any time soon and have
said so many, many times.

Socky, come back when you somehow manage to beg, borrow,
steal or buy a clue. Given how improverished you obviously
are, stealing seems to be your best option.

Socky wrote:
wrote in message
link.net...

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

[snip]

Let's look at your behavior.
You don't talk about audio.
You never actually debate anybody on anything, you simply proclaim.
[snip idiocy]
Mikey, George's remarks, as they are about your personality, are defacto
subjective, and therefore require no qualification.

You, on the other hand, constantly bore this group with repetitive slavish
remarks about ABX, and the sanctity of Arny Krueger, who should have a sex
change, since you obviously regard him as the Holy Mother of audio.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want in audio. As for this group,
it just depends upon how you put it across, and how often. Stop trying to
discredit everybody you disagree with. Stop posting link after link about
how good ABX is for hearing research, and cell phone codecs. Stop
proclaiming that Floyd This and Harry That are audio Gods, just because they
have nice jobs working for an audio conglomerate. Try to understand that
it's the attitude, not ABX, that we find objectionable.

Unless, of course, you come here to fight. Some people do that. But bear in
mind that it is an eternal battle. Neither you, nor your opponents, can
"win". You can't gain popularity; neither can we. There is no goal here that
is in itself worthwhile. This is not the land of prophets and oracles. The
best you can do is a good time. The worst you can do is a waste of time, if
you mistakenly think you can do more. Arny, who you admire so much, is
having a bad time, either because he wants a bad time, or because he is
doesn't understand that this is a landscape that will never change.

Like you I'm interested in the Nyob phenomenon. He says that he is a
crusader for truth and facts but with such friends truth needs no
enemies and facts change from day to day as convenient.

His truth goes like this:
9am. The day opens at the typewriter:

"ABX is great for unbiased uncovering of subtle/small differences
between components"

Than why don't you use it?

I don't need to. I KNOW how to choose my components.

What about me and Tom and Fred?

Don't you know that everybody needs an unbiased, matched level test?

But you just said...

You lying again?

10 am.
You said you chose your components sighted and that eg' "Dynaudio
are simply the best speakers I ever heard"
Didn't you say ""Sighted impressions are all flawed."

It is different when I say it. All others, especially the Stereophile
critics are liars. Liars need ABX.

Why ABX? It has never been shown to be a good tool for showing
differences between audio components.

You too are a LIAR. Its been shown MANY times to be one of the best if
not the best.

Please give me just a few addresses/refernces to those showings. I'd
like to go to a library and look them up. Because last time I had
looked all the panels using ABX found all the comparable components to
sound the same.

Type "ABX" into the web the way I did and you'll get hundreds of
green printings mentioning ABX. The way I did. You can post those reams
of titles (no quotes from the contents) the way I did. Next you can say
that nearly everybody uses it in research into nearly anything. Like
the Nokia for cell-phones and the hearing aid manufacturers not to
mention the BBC., the H-K and all those others.

12 midday:

"I did what you told me. BBC had hundreds of long papers listed. They
did not mention ABX, not once.
H-K did not use ABX in any of their numerous published white papers
and specifically not for comparing loudspeakers.

Nokia advertises their cellphones but have nothing to say about using
ABX to uncover subtle differences between audio components.
As for hearing aids I did not know which ones of them did audio
component comparisons. Could you possibly be more specific: and give
me: journal, author date. Or was it all a special secret communication
for your ears only from hearing aids people and all those other
nameless researchers that you can not disclose?

"Its not my fault that you're too lazy to do your own research. I
can only point you the right way".

1pm

"I looked closely through the BBC files. Still no ABX."

Oops that was an error. ABX Shmaybx. They used single blind test once,
didn't they?. Blind tests are great. ABX is just a... hmm, let's
see a subsidiary, no a subchapter, no a subtext- yes I got the right
word - it is a subtext of DBTs. From now on when I mean ABX I say DBT
and vice-versa. That's science for you.

So where does that leave poor Arny's invention?

He'll have to fight his own battles. I have enough problems. Remember
whenever they tell you ABX has not been shown to work just answer
"DBT, and add "a subtext" then " all the researchers..." That
will floor them.

2pm.

"They say that if you have a weapon for uncovering subtle differences
you should have no problem using it to identify correctly, with
statistical validity different comparable cartridges and loudspeakers.
People are challenging you to a bet"

I don't want to hear clicks on the LP. ever again"

You say nothing about a bet for identifying loudspeakers. Surely quite
a few would spare a hundred just to shut you up

Hmm, you know.. technical difficulties. That kind of thing. I'll have
to think about it.. what?

4pm.

"One Mirabel complains that where he enthusiastically endorses the
use of DBTs for selecting loudspeakers you said to Sean Olive that "a
person" was against that use. Sean Olive then emailed you his
disagreement with that person's" silliness. Whereupon you proceeded
to post Sean Olive's condemnation of that "person's" views in
the forum under the heading: "Guess what Sean Olive had to say about
Ludovic's remarks" Except he said it about your forgery not
"Ludovic's remarks"
Mirabel thought it was disgusting to forge the exact opposite of what
he had said but no worse than he expected of you. He says intellectual
honesty is a foreign country where you live."

Let him say what he wants. I achieved my aim didn't I? Tell them I
just "slightly paraphrased" Mirabel's views. Who will remember in
two weeks time who said what to whom. That's the way to play the
game.

Conclusions:

So what makes NYOB run? Why does he post umpteen times per day, twists,
lies and forges,
At last there is an answer.
He used to be an audio salesman.
NYOB explains
"I didn't fail at it, I just got sick of it. Sales is not a field I
feel
good about in general, and while I loved being around all the
equipment, I
didn't like the restrictions. Having to sell whatever had the best
spiffs,
irrespective of being the best for a given need...."
As a salesman he lied through his teeth every day to sell what he knew
wasn't worth a dime. Lying became a second nature- but somewhere deep
down he felt uneasy cheating people out of their money.
Nowadays he can twist, lie and forge in defence of what he truly
believes in.
He took a quantum leap into another ethical dimension and believe it or
not he feels great about it

8am 3 days later:

Still no rejoinder from NYOB to either Socky's or my comments about
him. Truly surprising from someone usually so prolific.
Or did we convince him into taking a vow of silence? It must be killing
him.
Ludovic Mirabel

wrote in message
oups.com...

Socky wrote:
wrote in message
link.net...

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

[snip]

Let's look at your behavior.
You don't talk about audio.
You never actually debate anybody on anything, you simply proclaim.
[snip idiocy]
Mikey, George's remarks, as they are about your personality, are defacto
subjective, and therefore require no qualification.

You, on the other hand, constantly bore this group with repetitive
slavish
remarks about ABX,

Only when the protocol is falsely claimed to be something other than what it
is.

and the sanctity of Arny Krueger, who should have a sex
change, since you obviously regard him as the Holy Mother of audio.

Another lie. I admoire Arny's knowledge of thigs audio, but he's not the
only one for whom I have such respect, but the others are equally reviled by
the subjectivists and most have simply abandoned RAO.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want in audio. As for this
group,
it just depends upon how you put it across, and how often.

For me it's more important that what you say about audio be true, it less
improtant how you say it.

Stop trying to
discredit everybody you disagree with.

That goes both ways. I don't try to discredit people, only wrong
information.

Stop posting link after link about
how good ABX is for hearing research, and cell phone codecs. Stop
proclaiming that Floyd This and Harry That are audio Gods, just because
they
have nice jobs working for an audio conglomerate.

Not Gods, but among the most respected people in Audio.

Try to understand that
it's the attitude, not ABX, that we find objectionable.

Bull****.

Unless, of course, you come here to fight.

I didn't but people who don't like it when you tell them they are wrong
about something and then show them how they are wrong, seem to get kinda
****y when you do it, no matter how you do it.

Some people do that. But bear in
mind that it is an eternal battle. Neither you, nor your opponents, can
"win".

You can't win against people who won't concede when they have been shown
conclusively to be in error.

You can't gain popularity; neither can we.

Never been a goal.

There is no goal here that
is in itself worthwhile. This is not the land of prophets and oracles.

No but it should be a place where people can learn and discuss things
without the constant name calling and endless attacks.

The
best you can do is a good time.

Who says I'm not having a good time?

The worst you can do is a waste of time, if
you mistakenly think you can do more. Arny, who you admire so much, is
having a bad time, either because he wants a bad time, or because he is
doesn't understand that this is a landscape that will never change.

Or maybe because people have been giving him a bad time, since he first made
a correction of someone's sacred cow belief about audio.


Like you I'm interested in the Nyob phenomenon. He says that he is a
crusader for truth and facts but with such friends truth needs no
enemies and facts change from day to day as convenient.


I say no such thing.

His truth goes like this:
9am. The day opens at the typewriter:

"ABX is great for unbiased uncovering of subtle/small differences
between components"

Than why don't you use it?

I don't need to. I KNOW how to choose my components.

What about me and Tom and Fred?

Don't you know that everybody needs an unbiased, matched level test?

But you just said...

You lying again?

10 am.
You said you chose your components sighted and that eg' "Dynaudio
are simply the best speakers I ever heard"
Didn't you say ""Sighted impressions are all flawed."

It is different when I say it. All others, especially the Stereophile
critics are liars. Liars need ABX.

Why ABX? It has never been shown to be a good tool for showing
differences between audio components.

You too are a LIAR. Its been shown MANY times to be one of the best if
not the best.

Please give me just a few addresses/refernces to those showings. I'd
like to go to a library and look them up. Because last time I had
looked all the panels using ABX found all the comparable components to
sound the same.

Type "ABX" into the web the way I did and you'll get hundreds of
green printings mentioning ABX. The way I did. You can post those reams
of titles (no quotes from the contents) the way I did. Next you can say
that nearly everybody uses it in research into nearly anything. Like
the Nokia for cell-phones and the hearing aid manufacturers not to
mention the BBC., the H-K and all those others.

12 midday:

"I did what you told me. BBC had hundreds of long papers listed. They
did not mention ABX, not once.
H-K did not use ABX in any of their numerous published white papers
and specifically not for comparing loudspeakers.

Nokia advertises their cellphones but have nothing to say about using
ABX to uncover subtle differences between audio components.
As for hearing aids I did not know which ones of them did audio
component comparisons. Could you possibly be more specific: and give
me: journal, author date. Or was it all a special secret communication
for your ears only from hearing aids people and all those other
nameless researchers that you can not disclose?

"Its not my fault that you're too lazy to do your own research. I
can only point you the right way".

1pm

"I looked closely through the BBC files. Still no ABX."

Oops that was an error. ABX Shmaybx. They used single blind test once,
didn't they?. Blind tests are great. ABX is just a... hmm, let's
see a subsidiary, no a subchapter, no a subtext- yes I got the right
word - it is a subtext of DBTs. From now on when I mean ABX I say DBT
and vice-versa. That's science for you.

So where does that leave poor Arny's invention?

He'll have to fight his own battles. I have enough problems. Remember
whenever they tell you ABX has not been shown to work just answer
"DBT, and add "a subtext" then " all the researchers..." That
will floor them.

2pm.

"They say that if you have a weapon for uncovering subtle differences
you should have no problem using it to identify correctly, with
statistical validity different comparable cartridges and loudspeakers.
People are challenging you to a bet"

I don't want to hear clicks on the LP. ever again"

You say nothing about a bet for identifying loudspeakers. Surely quite
a few would spare a hundred just to shut you up

Hmm, you know.. technical difficulties. That kind of thing. I'll have
to think about it.. what?

4pm.

"One Mirabel complains that where he enthusiastically endorses the
use of DBTs for selecting loudspeakers you said to Sean Olive that "a
person" was against that use. Sean Olive then emailed you his
disagreement with that person's" silliness. Whereupon you proceeded
to post Sean Olive's condemnation of that "person's" views in
the forum under the heading: "Guess what Sean Olive had to say about
Ludovic's remarks" Except he said it about your forgery not
"Ludovic's remarks"
Mirabel thought it was disgusting to forge the exact opposite of what
he had said but no worse than he expected of you. He says intellectual
honesty is a foreign country where you live."

Let him say what he wants. I achieved my aim didn't I? Tell them I
just "slightly paraphrased" Mirabel's views. Who will remember in
two weeks time who said what to whom. That's the way to play the
game.

Conclusions:

So what makes NYOB run? Why does he post umpteen times per day, twists,
lies and forges,
At last there is an answer.
He used to be an audio salesman.
NYOB explains
"I didn't fail at it, I just got sick of it. Sales is not a field I
feel
good about in general, and while I loved being around all the
equipment, I
didn't like the restrictions. Having to sell whatever had the best
spiffs,
irrespective of being the best for a given need...."
As a salesman he lied through his teeth every day to sell what he knew
wasn't worth a dime. Lying became a second nature- but somewhere deep
down he felt uneasy cheating people out of their money.
Nowadays he can twist, lie and forge in defence of what he truly
believes in.
He took a quantum leap into another ethical dimension and believe it or
not he feels great about it

8am 3 days later:

Still no rejoinder from NYOB to either Socky's or my comments about
him. Truly surprising from someone usually so prolific.
Or did we convince him into taking a vow of silence? It must be killing
him.
Ludovic Mirabel

Sometimes replying to much nonsense becomes boring and I just back off and
leave it alone. How many times can you prove somebody wrong? How many
times can you be cordial and get a **** storm in response?

I've explained repeatedly why I defend ABX. It is a valuable research tool
that is used, even if the results aren't published, by virtually everyone
doing ANY kind of audio research.

Two of the most respected names in audio endorse it, the AES endorses it,
and it is good for what it is meant for, revealing subtle differences.

As long as I hold that position, I will be in trouble with certain people
here.

I hope there are people with enough sense to see through the smoke screens
prsented in arguement against the ABX protocol.

I have not had a reason to use it becuase I know what standard of
performance will allow me get equipment that is neutral sounding, that is
that adds no sound of it's own, and I'm able to get relaible information on
what gear meets that criteria.

This doesn't mean that I don't listen to the equipment that I buy.

I like speakers that have smooth response across the range their range of
operation.
I have heard enough speakers and seen the drivers used to know that certain
companies produce better drivers, Dynaudio is certainly one of those, as is
Scan Speak and SEAS.
Just look at the number of highly regarded speaker systems that use drivers
from these companies. Dynaudio's own line of speakers are the pick of the
BBC and many audiophiles. They also find their way into many other systems
such as Sonus Faber, who also use Scan Speak drive units. The Merlin VSM
uses drivers from both these companies. Joseph Audio speakers which are
constantly winning praise use SEAS drivers, so it seems to me that my
prefernce for Dynaudio is well founded.