Hi,

First post here. I am on a limited budget (teacher's salary) and am
looking at the Atlantic Technology 270THX speaker system. I found
them for 1795.00 at reliableaudiovideo.com. Can anyone comment on
this particular system or any system by Atlantic Technology. I am
unable to listen to them before purchasing as this little po-dunk town
I live in has a Best Buy and a Circuit City and they of course want
you to know that Bose is the best. Yeah, uh-huh Anyway, any info
would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Mike

wrote in message

Hi,

First post here. I am on a limited budget (teacher's salary) and am
looking at the Atlantic Technology 270THX speaker system. I found
them for 1795.00 at reliableaudiovideo.com. Can anyone comment on
this particular system or any system by Atlantic Technology. I am
unable to listen to them before purchasing as this little po-dunk town
I live in has a Best Buy and a Circuit City and they of course want
you to know that Bose is the best. Yeah, uh-huh Anyway, any info
would be greatly appreciated.

Atlantic Technology has a decent reputation for producing good-sounding
speakers. The system you've chosen seems to be both popular and reasonably
robust. The stated price seems to be pretty typical.

Reference:
http://www.atlantictechnology.com/pu...ystem270_2.pdf

The S&V review from their web site includes a fair amount of factual
technical information that basically describes a really pretty good set of
speakers for the price. I'd certainly rather have these than
similarly-priced Bose!

How would they compare to AperionAudio speakers?

Mike

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 02:47:33 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

wrote in message

Hi,

First post here. I am on a limited budget (teacher's salary) and am
looking at the Atlantic Technology 270THX speaker system. I found
them for 1795.00 at reliableaudiovideo.com. Can anyone comment on
this particular system or any system by Atlantic Technology. I am
unable to listen to them before purchasing as this little po-dunk town
I live in has a Best Buy and a Circuit City and they of course want
you to know that Bose is the best. Yeah, uh-huh Anyway, any info
would be greatly appreciated.

Atlantic Technology has a decent reputation for producing good-sounding
speakers. The system you've chosen seems to be both popular and reasonably
robust. The stated price seems to be pretty typical.

Reference:
http://www.atlantictechnology.com/pu...ystem270_2.pdf

The S&V review from their web site includes a fair amount of factual
technical information that basically describes a really pretty good set of
speakers for the price. I'd certainly rather have these than
similarly-priced Bose!

wrote in message


How would they compare to AperionAudio speakers?

Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's "DiAural"
technology, they are easy to dismiss.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 04:37:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

wrote in message


How would they compare to AperionAudio speakers?

Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's "DiAural"
technology, they are easy to dismiss.

Well, that cinches it. They must have really good sounding speakers,
Mike.

Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's "DiAural"
technology, they are easy to dismiss.

Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan, Genesis,
Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea that cables make a
difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any speaker brand just on their
position on cable sound.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message


Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's
"DiAural" technology, they are easy to dismiss.

Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan,
Genesis, Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea
that cables make a difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any
speaker brand just on their position on cable sound.

Just goes to show how willing you are to comment on things you don't
understand, sockpuppet Wheel. You just tried to ream me out for doing this,
and now you do it yourself.

Futhermore, far be it from me to claim that speaker cables can't make a
difference. If I believed that speaker cables can't make a difference why
did I post an lengthy, detailed article about choosing speaker cables at my
www.pcavtech.com web site?

Sockpuppet Wheel, just for grins do try to find out what "DiAural" means
and what it relates to, and then get back to us with your mea culpa.

note to lurkers - I'm not seriously expecting sockpuppet Wheel to publicly
admit his egregious error here, but then again he could start acting like a
man of integrity at any moment.

Hint #1: "DiAural" has nothing to do with speaker cables.

Hint #2, One might find a more complete but embarrassingly laughable
description of "DiAural" at the Stereophile web site.

Hint #3, DiAural's snake oil content has been covered at length in the
google archives. The operative phrase is something like "European patent".

In article ,
(S888Wheel) wrote:


Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's "DiAural"
technology, they are easy to dismiss.

Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan, Genesis,
Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea that cables make a
difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any speaker brand just on their
position on cable sound.

"DiAural" is a crossover design. You'd have to shut down the entire
industry if you outlawed proprietary names for designs.

Stephen

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
(S888Wheel) wrote:


Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's
"DiAural" technology, they are easy to dismiss.

Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan,
Genesis, Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea
that cables make a difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any
speaker brand just on their position on cable sound.

"DiAural" is a crossover design. You'd have to shut down the entire
industry if you outlawed proprietary names for designs.

Actually you've hit on a major point. The European patent for the "Diaural"
crossover design (which I've seen), shows schematics that were familiar to
speaker designers some twenty or more years before the patent was applied
for.

It's unlikely there could ever be a U.S. patent for the "DiAural"
technology, even with the current relaxed attitude among the patent
reviewers, relating to prior art.

IOW, the "DiAural" technology is exactly as you say, a proprietary name for
technology that has been around for a long time. What's new are the claims
made for it, which are snake oil in their own right.

MINe 109 said:

"DiAural" is a crossover design. You'd have to shut down the entire
industry if you outlawed proprietary names for designs.

I can just hear the "Amen!" from Goose Pointe.....

Arny said


Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's
"DiAural" technology, they are easy to dismiss.


I said


Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan,
Genesis, Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea
that cables make a difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any
speaker brand just on their position on cable sound.



Arny said



Just goes to show how willing you are to comment on things you don't
understand, sockpuppet Wheel.

Wrong. i understood exactly what you did Arny. You dismissed a speaker company
based on thier views on cable and not on actually auditioning thier products. I
simply pointed out the falacy of your logic by pointing to excellent speaker
manufacturers that also have views on cables that run contrary to your belief
system. I completely understood what you did. It was bull****.

Arny said



You just tried to ream me out for doing this,
and now you do it yourself.


No Arny, I called you on your habitual thread crapping. Warning the original
poster of this thread that your suggestion for dismisal of a speaker company
based on their beliefs in cable sound was not a good idea. I supported my
position by citing a number of manufacturers of outstanding speaker systems at
many price levels that also have beliefs about cable sound that run contrary
to your beliefs.


Arny said






Futhermore, far be it from me to claim that speaker cables can't make a
difference.


But you think you can dismiss a speaker manufacturer based on thier claims
about cable sound without auditioning thier speakers. hypocrite.


Arny said



If I believed that speaker cables can't make a difference why
did I post an lengthy, detailed article about choosing speaker cables at my
www.pcavtech.com web site?

Are you asking me to speculate on what motivates you? Stupidity, malice,
dishonestly, class envy and a complete disconnect with reality would be my
general answer. Since I don't visit your webpage, I see no point in speculating
on your motives for anything in particular you publish there.


Arny said



Sockpuppet Wheel, just for grins do try to find out what "DiAural" means
and what it relates to, and then get back to us with your mea culpa.

note to lurkers - I'm not seriously expecting sockpuppet Wheel to publicly
admit his egregious error here, but then again he could start acting like a
man of integrity at any moment.



No error was made. You were caught making recomendations on personal prejudice
rather than empirical experience.


Arny said


Hint #1: "DiAural" has nothing to do with speaker cables.

Hint #2, One might find a more complete but embarrassingly laughable
description of "DiAural" at the Stereophile web site.

Hint #3, DiAural's snake oil content has been covered at length in the
google archives. The operative phrase is something like "European patent".


Hint #4 Arny can't get around the fact that he dismissed the entire product
line of a speaker company with no empirical experience with thier products and
no substantiated technical reasons based on their design and execution. It was
pure prejudice.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

Arny said


Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's
"DiAural" technology, they are easy to dismiss.


I said


Given the fact that many speaker manufacturers such as Martin Logan,
Genesis, Soundlab, Wilson Audio, and Vandersteen advocate the idea
that cables make a difference it seems unreasonable to dismiss any
speaker brand just on their position on cable sound.



Arny said



Just goes to show how willing you are to comment on things you don't
understand, sockpuppet Wheel.

Wrong. i understood exactly what you did Arny.

see folks, I predicted that sockpuppet wheel wouldn't admit to making a big
mistake

You dismissed a
speaker company based on their views on cable and not on actually
auditioning their products.

Still wrong, as anybody who checks my references below will see. Either
you've haven't done your homework sockpuppet wheel, or you simply can't read
and correctly perceive.

I simply pointed out the fallacy of your
logic by pointing to excellent speaker manufacturers that also have
views on cables that run contrary to your belief system.

How many times do I have to prove to you that this has nothing to do with
cables, sockpuppet wheel? You're one tough nut to get through to! But, I
already knew that.

I completely understood what you did.

If so why did you get it wrong twice, once after I proved that you were
wrong.

It was bull****.

You're still talking irrelevant trash, sockpuppet wheel.


Arny said

You just tried to ream me out for doing this,
and now you do it yourself.

No Arny, I called you on your habitual thread crapping.

You call it crap, I call it analysis.

Warning the
original poster of this thread that your suggestion for dismissal of a
speaker company based on their beliefs in cable sound was not a good
idea.

It's such a bad idea that I never did it!

I supported my position by citing a number of manufacturers of
outstanding speaker systems at many price levels that also have
beliefs about cable sound that run contrary to your beliefs.

And sockpuppet wheel I showed with independent references why you were
wrong. Heck, another poster also pointed out that this is really about
crossovers and you still don't get it!

Arny said

Furthermore, far be it from me to claim that speaker cables can't make
a difference.

But you think you can dismiss a speaker manufacturer based on their
claims about cable sound without auditioning their speakers.

Nope.

hypocrite.

Not nearly the hypocrite but more significantly stupid fool that you are,
sockpuppet wheel.

Arny said


If I believed that speaker cables can't make a difference why
did I post an lengthy, detailed article about choosing speaker cables
at my www.pcavtech.com web site?

Are you asking me to speculate on what motivates you?

Actually, I was looking for signs of intelligent life in your rock-hard
cranium sockpuppet wheel. Mission Impossible!


Stupidity,
malice, dishonestly, class envy and a complete disconnect with
reality would be my general answer.

Since I'm known to be well-educated, document my claims with independent
sources, and clearly live in the 21st century, we can take your comments as
being autobiographical, sockpuppet wheel.

Since I don't visit your web page,


Yup sockpuppet wheel, you're too smart to actually look at cited evidence.

I see no point in speculating on your motives for anything in
particular you publish there.

Perhaps actually following up on a posted link is too hard for you to do,
sockpuppet Wheel?

Arny said



Sockpuppet Wheel, just for grins do try to find out what "DiAural"
means and what it relates to, and then get back to us with your mea
culpa.

note to lurkers - I'm not seriously expecting sockpuppet Wheel to
publicly admit his egregious error here, but then again he could
start acting like a man of integrity at any moment.

No error was made.

The world should be laughing at you by now, sockpuppet wheel. Well, the tiny
part of the world that might actually care about trivial facts like your
arrogance and stupidity.

You were caught making recommendations on personal
prejudice rather than empirical experience.

The fact of the matter is that you're ranting and raving about cables and
anybody who looks at the evidence I cited, plus some people with familiarity
with the issue from past discussions knows that this is about crossovers.

Arny said


Hint #1: "DiAural" has nothing to do with speaker cables.

Hint #2, One might find a more complete but embarrassingly laughable
description of "DiAural" at the Stereophile web site.

Hint #3, DiAural's snake oil content has been covered at length in the
google archives. The operative phrase is something like "European
patent".

Hint #4 Arny can't get around the fact that he dismissed the entire
product line of a speaker company with no empirical experience with
their products and no substantiated technical reasons based on their
design and execution. It was pure prejudice.

Proven wrong by the fact that anybody who looks at the references knows its
about crossovers. In another post on this thread another poster made clear
references to the fact that "DiAural" is about crossovers, which is of
course the right answer.

So, there is intelligent life on RAO, just don't look for evidence of it in
the posts of sockpuppet Wheel.

Very sad. Even a bit troubling.

BTW, I corrected about two dozen simple, consistently misspelled words in
sockpuppet wheel's post. When he's wrong, at least he's consistently wrong!

Arny said



Just goes to show how willing you are to comment on things you don't
understand, sockpuppet Wheel.


I said


Wrong. I understood exactly what you did Arny.



Arny said




see folks, I predicted that sockpuppet wheel wouldn't admit to making a big
mistake



I see now that my presumption that cables were at issue because of the name
Kimber was a mistake on my part. Calling you on your dismissal of an entire
line of products based on prejudice rather than empirical experience was not a
mistake. Mistaken facts based on presumptions is not the same thing as a lack
of understanding.

I said



You dismissed a
speaker company based on their views on cable and not on actually
auditioning their products.


Arny said




Still wrong, as anybody who checks my references below will see. Either
you've haven't done your homework sockpuppet wheel, or you simply can't read
and correctly perceive.

Technically I am wrong because of my mistake over cables being the issue but in
essence I am right. You have suggested that an entire line of products be
dismissed over differences in beliefs you have with the manufacturer and not
based on any meaningful experience you have with the products. I think that is
wrong of you.

I said



I completely understood what you did.


Arny said




If so why did you get it wrong twice, once after I proved that you were
wrong.


I got it part wrong twice because of my presumptions formed around the name
Kimber. That doesn't excuse your dismissal of a line of products based
completely on your prejudice.



I said



No Arny, I called you on your habitual thread crapping.


Arny said




You call it crap, I call it analysis.


I suppose taking unfounded prejudicial jabs at a medium that seems angers you
for irrational reasons is about as close as you will get to making any
"analysis" of the content of that thread regarding products from Simply Vinyl.
Just because it is your best effort doesn't make your thread crapping smell any
less repulsive.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message


I see now that my presumption that cables were at issue because of
the name Kimber was a mistake on my part.

Thanks for finally seeing your error.


Calling you on your
dismissal of an entire line of products based on prejudice rather
than empirical experience was not a mistake.

You call it prejudice, I call it analysis.

Mistaken facts based on
presumptions is not the same thing as a lack of understanding.

I'll leave the mistaken facts and presumptions up to you, since they seem to
be things that you are a lot more comfortable than I am. I find it
revelatory that after you admit that you are wrong about the major point,
you then try to change the thread into a context where you somehow think you
can claim that you're right anyway. In fact you're wrong on both points, as
I'll shortly show.

I said

You dismissed a
speaker company based on their views on cable and not on actually
auditioning their products.

Arny said

Still wrong, as anybody who checks my references below will see.
Either you've haven't done your homework sockpuppet wheel, or you
simply can't read and correctly perceive.

Technically I am wrong because of my mistake over cables being the
issue but in essence I am right.

Self-deceptive double talk.

You have suggested that an entire
line of products be dismissed over differences in beliefs you have
with the manufacturer and not based on any meaningful experience you
have with the products. I think that is wrong of you.

Sure, if you want to deceptively minimize importance of the observable
facts, which is one of your pitiful habits sockpuppet wheel, you can call it
a difference in belief. Or, one can observe that Atlantic Technology has a
track record for producing high-performance loudspeakers at a reasonable
price and has been highly reviewed by tough, factually-based reviewers. One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and note
that the only reviews they have come from lightweight subjectivist review
sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

I said

I completely understood what you did.

Arny said

If so why did you get it wrong twice, once after I proved that you
were wrong.

I got it part wrong twice because of my presumptions formed around
the name Kimber. That doesn't excuse your dismissal of a line of
products based completely on your prejudice.

You know that same presumptions thing that got you burned once sockpuppet
wheel is burning you again. You presumed that my comparison of these two
sources was based solely on prejudice, when that wasn't the case.

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each listening to
and analyzing both systems before responding? In the sense that my opinion
would have basis rooted in detailed personal experience, yes. However in the
newsgroup context, the person asking the question would have very likely
moved on and never seen my response two weeks after he asked his question.
Also the chances that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a
detailed evaluation like this is basically zilch.

The criteria you've set up for me sockpuppet Wheel is totally unrealistic.
It's a criteria that you won't meet. just as certainly as I won't meet it.
It's just a debating trade trick. It's deceptive.


I said


No Arny, I called you on your habitual thread crapping.

Arny said



You call it crap, I call it analysis.

I suppose taking unfounded prejudicial jabs at a medium that seems
angers you for irrational reasons is about as close as you will get
to making any "analysis" of the content of that thread regarding
products from Simply Vinyl.

You seem to be having a problem with relevance here, sockpuppet wheel. This
isn't the Simply Vinyl thread, its the Atlantic Technology versus Aperion
Audio thread. Do try to remember where you are and what is relevant!

Just because it is your best effort
doesn't make your thread crapping smell any less repulsive.

You're just playing games, sockpuppet wheel. You may not have realized that
vinyl is irrelevant to virtually all audiophiles in the 21st century, but
many of the rest of us have. It's probable that the threads were contrived
to see if you could get some negative comments so that you and your thuggish
friends could have somebody to beat up on. The fact that you are now trying
to turn this thread into a continuation of that thread is very revealing.
You're not into RAO for the music, you're into it for the blood.

S888Wheel wrote:


I see now that my presumption that cables were at issue because of the name
Kimber was a mistake on my part. Calling you on your dismissal of an entire
line of products based on prejudice rather than empirical experience was not a
mistake. Mistaken facts based on presumptions is not the same thing as a lack
of understanding.

(

You made a fool of you playing "redemptor"...
Thanks for the fun !

--
"Keep the bugs off your glass and the bears off your ass"
Bad Plus

George M. Middius wrote:

MINe 109 said:


"DiAural" is a crossover design. You'd have to shut down the entire
industry if you outlawed proprietary names for designs.


I can just hear the "Amen!" from Goose Pointe.....


Sorry Georgetta, it's too late for a rescue.
Dave's wave has already drowned your champion !

--
"Keep the bugs off your glass and the bears off your ass"
Bad Plus

I said


I see now that my presumption that cables were at issue because of
the name Kimber was a mistake on my part.


Arny said


Thanks for finally seeing your error.


You are welcome.


I said



Calling you on your
dismissal of an entire line of products based on prejudice rather
than empirical experience was not a mistake.



Arny said




You call it prejudice, I call it analysis.



Well, if there was any analysis going on you did it in private. All you offered
was conclusions about a product line you have never heard. Without any
description of your analysis I have to call it prejudice. If you can cite any
specific elements of the design you think would cause the entire line to be
dismissed based on experience with other speakers that share those same alleged
design flaws that would constitute analysis and may show your position has
merit.


I said



Mistaken facts based on
presumptions is not the same thing as a lack of understanding.


Arny said




I'll leave the mistaken facts and presumptions up to you, since they seem to
be things that you are a lot more comfortable than I am.


If you want to try to rewrite this sentence so it makes sense I will happily
respond to it. As it stands it makes no sense. In light of the above sentence,
you have no business criticizing my grammar.


Arny said


I find it
revelatory that after you admit that you are wrong about the major point,
you then try to change the thread into a context where you somehow think you
can claim that you're right anyway.


it doesn't take a rocket science to see my general objection was to your
dismissal of a product line without any auctual experience with the product. My
mistaken presumption about the cause of your prejudice against this product
line does not change the broader problem i see with your dismissal. so, if you
really understood my point you would have seen that I was wrong about the
specifics of the minor part of my point. Until you can offer a good argument
that your dismissal was justified I stand by the major part of my point that I
find such dismissals based on prejudice instead of practical experience with
the product to be a bad idea.


Arny said


In fact you're wrong on both points, as
I'll shortly show.


If you do I will admit it. But you can't do it without further explanation.
Explanations that were painfully missing in other posts.




Sure, if you want to deceptively minimize importance of the observable
facts, which is one of your pitiful habits sockpuppet wheel, you can call it
a difference in belief. Or, one can observe that Atlantic Technology has a
track record for producing high-performance loudspeakers at a reasonable
price and has been highly reviewed by tough, factually-based reviewers. One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and note
that the only reviews they have come from lightweight subjectivist review
sources such as TAS, CNET etc.


Well, there you have it. Your dismissal is indeed based purely on prejudice. if
this is your evidence and argument that your dismissal was based on anything
other than prejudice you failed to prove your point. You have not heard the
product and you failed to cite any design flaws that are shared by other
products with which you have had practical experience. You really have no clue
what these speakers sound like and you dismissed them. I think that is a bad
idea.

Arny said




You know that same presumptions thing that got you burned once sockpuppet
wheel is burning you again. You presumed that my comparison of these two
sources was based solely on prejudice, when that wasn't the case.


so far the only evidence you offer that your dismissal was not prejudicial is
evidence that supports my claim that your dismissal was prejudicial. How is
that for irony? lets look at your evidence again. 1. a claim that Aperion lacks
a track record compared to Atlantic technology. This point is pure opinion and
says nothing about what the products actually sound like. 2.Aperion relies on
deceptive technology to hype their products. Deceptive because you say so? This
is merely evidence of your prejudice based on differing beliefs with the folks
at Aperion. 3. you don't like the magazines that have reviewed Aperion
products. This is a quintessential example of pure prejudice. How can one be
objective and scientific if one cannot see the difference between proof based
on empirical evidence and logic and proof based on pure prejudice? You were
right when you said you call it analysis and I call it prejudice.


Arny said



Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each listening to
and analyzing both systems before responding?


IMO it is, generally speaking, a good idea to have heard a product before
dismissing it. You always had the option to realize you lacked the requisite
experience with the products and simply refrained from dismissing one of them
out of hand.

Arny said



However in the
newsgroup context, the person asking the question would have very likely
moved on and never seen my response two weeks after he asked his question.

IMO this would have been better than your prejudicial dismissal no response is
usually better than an ill-informed response.


Arny said


Also the chances that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a
detailed evaluation like this is basically zilch.

Better for him to move on and maybe get an informed opinion somewhere else.

Arny said




The criteria you've set up for me sockpuppet Wheel is totally unrealistic.


I have not set up my criteria for you Arny. It is the same for everyone. I
think it is a bad idea for anyone to dismiss a line of speakers based on pure
prejudice. It is hardly unrealistic to expect people to keep comments on the
sonic performance of components to components that one has actually listened
to.

Arny said


It's a criteria that you won't meet.


bull****. Cite one example of me dismissing an entire line of speakers with no
personal experience with them. Cite one example of me doing anything like this
at all with any product I haven't listened to.


Arny said


just as certainly as I won't meet it.

The only way anyone won't meet my criteria for fair comment is if they feel
compelled to con others into believing they know more than they actually do.

Arny said




It's just a debating trade trick. It's deceptive.


Nonsense. It is a reasonable standard that anybody with integrity and a
controlled ego can live with.


I said



Just because it is your best effort
doesn't make your thread crapping smell any less repulsive.



Arny said



You're just playing games, sockpuppet wheel. You may not have realized that
vinyl is irrelevant to virtually all audiophiles in the 21st century, but
many of the rest of us have.

If you find a thread irrelevant to your interest stay the **** away from it. It
is laughable that someone who has made over 90,000 posts on Usenet would
presume to speak for other people as if you were not completely disconnected
form reality.


Arny said


It's probable that the threads were contrived
to see if you could get some negative comments so that you and your thuggish
friends could have somebody to beat up on.

This shows that you are driven by paranoia, stupidity and hatred. The posts
were audio related posts for people with an interest in the best issues of
certain recordings. Remember what this forum is called? Rec. audio.opinions? I
was offering opinions on audio that others seemed to find interesting and maybe
even useful. Why you felt compelled to crap on it is beyond me.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

I said


I see now that my presumption that cables were at issue because of
the name Kimber was a mistake on my part.


Arny said


Thanks for finally seeing your error.


You are welcome.


I said



Calling you on your
dismissal of an entire line of products based on prejudice rather
than empirical experience was not a mistake.



Arny said




You call it prejudice, I call it analysis.



Well, if there was any analysis going on you did it in private.

Well, dooh. Where is it written that I have to post a detailed analysis of
my thought processes everytime I post an opinion?

All you offered was conclusions about a product line you have never
heard.

I you look at the thread, nobody who posts here has ever heard it, including
yourself sockpuppet wheel.

Without any description of your analysis I have to call it
prejudice.

It's like you to always presume the worst about everybody except the members
of your clique, who can do no wrong.

If you can cite any specific elements of the design you
think would cause the entire line to be dismissed based on experience
with other speakers that share those same alleged design flaws that
would constitute analysis and may show your position has merit.

Still having problems with adding two and two I see. OK well let me lay it
out for you so you can **** on it, as is your accustomed style.

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows the news
should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the technical community to
Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover design. Furthermore, anybody who
really understands how speakers work and reads Kimber's claims for "DiAural"
should know that they're the audio equivalent of an engine with 110%
efficiency.


it doesn't take a rocket science to see my general objection was to
your dismissal of a product line without any auctual experience with
the product.

Right, but in the face of it, what do we have to go on that's useful?


My mistaken presumption about the cause of your
prejudice against this product line does not change the broader
problem i see with your dismissal.

Yes, you are a very self-righteous and hypocritical person sockpuppet Wheel.
You have a long track record of setting up impossible hurdles for people you
don't like while tolerating and even congratulating highly egregious
behavior by yourself and people that you do like.

You know, I was over on the http://www.stereotimes.com/ web site thinking:
"I'll bet sockpuppet wheel eats this crap up for breakfast, lunch, and
dinner and thinks it's just great. As they say, living well is the best
revenge.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and note
that the only reviews they have come from lightweight subjectivist review
sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

Get back to us when you've actually *listened* to the speakers, won't
you?

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each listening to
and analyzing both systems before responding? In the sense that my opinion
would have basis rooted in detailed personal experience, yes. However in the
newsgroup context, the person asking the question would have very likely
moved on and never seen my response two weeks after he asked his question.
Also the chances that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a
detailed evaluation like this is basically zilch.

So, you think it's better to possibly influence someone based on *no*
empirical evidence about the actual sound of the product?

Boy, if this is 'science", frankly, I'm not sure I want any part of
it.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows the news
should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the technical community to
Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover design.

It would be interesting to see some proof of this "unfavorable
reception" that is claimed.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows
the news should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the
technical community to Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover
design.

It would be interesting to see some proof of this "unfavorable reception"
that is claimed.

Weil, since you'll rupture youself spewing denial if I dredge it up from
google, I'll not waste my time. The topic is way over your head, anyway.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and
note that the only reviews they have come from lightweight
subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

Get back to us when you've actually *listened* to the speakers, won't
you?

Since listening to the speakers seems to be a higher priority with you and
sockpuppet Wheel Weil, I will first wait for your in-depth report comparing
the two speaker set-ups.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each
listening to and analyzing both systems before responding? In the
sense that my opinion would have basis rooted in detailed personal
experience, yes. However in the newsgroup context, the person asking
the question would have very likely moved on and never seen my
response two weeks after he asked his question. Also the chances
that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a detailed
evaluation like this is basically zilch.

So, you think it's better to possibly influence someone based on *no*
empirical evidence about the actual sound of the product?

I view my advice as a "yes" for Atlantic Technology.

Boy, if this is 'science", frankly, I'm not sure I want any part of
it.

I'm sure you want no part of science whatsoever, Weil, You've as much as
said so here weekly for what 4 years?

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:38:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows
the news should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the
technical community to Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover
design.

It would be interesting to see some proof of this "unfavorable reception"
that is claimed.

Weil, since you'll rupture youself spewing denial if I dredge it up from
google, I'll not waste my time. The topic is way over your head, anyway.

I see. You can't do it.

OK.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:39:54 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and
note that the only reviews they have come from lightweight
subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

Get back to us when you've actually *listened* to the speakers, won't
you?

Since listening to the speakers seems to be a higher priority with you and
sockpuppet Wheel Weil, I will first wait for your in-depth report comparing
the two speaker set-ups.

Since I didn't make any libelous claims about the speakers, your
strawman is dismissed.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and
note that the only reviews they have come from lightweight
subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

The review from MSNBC wasn't about the technology, it was about making the
technology accessible via the web.

But thanks for behaving as deceptive and smarmy as ever, Weil.

Interestingly enough the MSNBC article also announced PCABX which
subsequently got favorable reviews from a number of far more technical
publications.

The basic fallacy of Weil and sockpuppet Wheel is that they apparently
think that no action should be taken unless it exceeds their wildest
expectations. Focus on that word "wild". You're supposed to overlook the
fact that in the real world of audio, they are both certifiable non-players.
Weil collects broken and unrepairable classic speakers, and sockpuppet wheel
is so afraid of his own shadow that he won't say much at all about what he
does.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:41:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each
listening to and analyzing both systems before responding? In the
sense that my opinion would have basis rooted in detailed personal
experience, yes. However in the newsgroup context, the person asking
the question would have very likely moved on and never seen my
response two weeks after he asked his question. Also the chances
that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a detailed
evaluation like this is basically zilch.

So, you think it's better to possibly influence someone based on *no*
empirical evidence about the actual sound of the product?

I view my advice as a "yes" for Atlantic Technology.

Then you should give it a yes without putting down a speaker that
you've never heard.

Or maybe you think that Atlantic Technology is the only choice to
make. Therefore, you can tell us all about *your* Atlantic Technology
speakers. You know, the ones you've bought because they are better
than all others.

Boy, if this is 'science", frankly, I'm not sure I want any part of
it.

I'm sure you want no part of science whatsoever, Weil, You've as much as
said so here weekly for what 4 years?

I *am* a fan of the appropriate use of commas.

And I'm a fan of science that's actually science, not your bizarro
snake oil version.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:38:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows
the news should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the
technical community to Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover
design.

It would be interesting to see some proof of this "unfavorable
reception" that is claimed.

Weil, since you'll rupture youself spewing denial if I dredge it up
from google, I'll not waste my time. The topic is way over your
head, anyway.

I see. You can't do it.

I sure can. I just tested the google search keys I mentioned yesterday, and
they worked. Just goes to show that you can lead a horse to water but...

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:39:54 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's
track record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their
products, and note that the only reviews they have come from
lightweight subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

Get back to us when you've actually *listened* to the speakers,
won't you?

Since listening to the speakers seems to be a higher priority with
you and sockpuppet Wheel Weil, I will first wait for your in-depth
report comparing the two speaker set-ups.

Since I didn't make any libelous claims about the speakers, your
strawman is dismissed.

Yup, this is the new law according to Weil and sockpuppet wheel. Opinions
expressed as opinions on a forum called opinion are libel.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:41:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each
listening to and analyzing both systems before responding? In the
sense that my opinion would have basis rooted in detailed personal
experience, yes. However in the newsgroup context, the person
asking the question would have very likely moved on and never seen
my response two weeks after he asked his question. Also the chances
that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a detailed
evaluation like this is basically zilch.

So, you think it's better to possibly influence someone based on
*no* empirical evidence about the actual sound of the product?

I view my advice as a "yes" for Atlantic Technology.

Then you should give it a yes without putting down a speaker that
you've never heard.

Big lie #2, I didn't put down any particular Aperion Audio speaker.

Or maybe you think that Atlantic Technology is the only choice to
make.

Can't read can you Weil? I said I'd rather have Atlantic Technology than
Bose and Aperion. I guess in Weil World, there are just three speaker
manufacturers, Atlantic Technology, Bose and Aperion.

Therefore, you can tell us all about *your* Atlantic Technology
speakers. You know, the ones you've bought because they are better
than all others.

Inability to read and comprehend simple English noted.

Boy, if this is 'science", frankly, I'm not sure I want any part of
it.

I'm sure you want no part of science whatsoever, Weil, You've as
much as said so here weekly for what 4 years?

I *am* a fan of the appropriate use of commas.

Too bad you aren't rigorous about English style in your own posts, Weil.
Another example of your hypocrisy.

And I'm a fan of science that's actually science, not your bizarro
snake oil version.

If irony killed...

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:51:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's track
record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their products, and
note that the only reviews they have come from lightweight
subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

The review from MSNBC wasn't about the technology, it was about making the
technology accessible via the web.

Which is by definition about technology.

But thanks for behaving as deceptive and smarmy as ever, Weil.

Interestingly enough the MSNBC article also announced PCABX which
subsequently got favorable reviews from a number of far more technical
publications.

They also used the word "internet", which has been used by far more
technical publications.

The basic fallacy of Weil and sockpuppet Wheel is that they apparently
think that no action should be taken unless it exceeds their wildest
expectations. Focus on that word "wild". You're supposed to overlook the
fact that in the real world of audio, they are both certifiable non-players.
Weil collects broken and unrepairable classic speakers, and sockpuppet wheel
is so afraid of his own shadow that he won't say much at all about what he
does.

Let's see. How many lies can we find in the preceding paragraph? I see
at least one which is indisputably a lie.

I wonder how many non-working components Arnold might have in his
possession.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:52:33 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:38:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows
the news should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the
technical community to Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover
design.

It would be interesting to see some proof of this "unfavorable
reception" that is claimed.

Weil, since you'll rupture youself spewing denial if I dredge it up
from google, I'll not waste my time. The topic is way over your
head, anyway.

I see. You can't do it.

I sure can. I just tested the google search keys I mentioned yesterday, and
they worked. Just goes to show that you can lead a horse to water but...

I guess you can't do it.

shrug

I'm not all that surprised, since you've had problems with search
engines in the past.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:53:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:39:54 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

One
can also observe that Aperion Audio lacks Atlantic Technology's
track record, relies on deceptive terminology to hype their
products, and note that the only reviews they have come from
lightweight subjectivist review sources such as TAS, CNET etc.

Sort of like getting reviews about technology from MSNBC, eh?

Get back to us when you've actually *listened* to the speakers,
won't you?

Since listening to the speakers seems to be a higher priority with
you and sockpuppet Wheel Weil, I will first wait for your in-depth
report comparing the two speaker set-ups.

Since I didn't make any libelous claims about the speakers, your
strawman is dismissed.

Yup, this is the new law according to Weil and sockpuppet wheel. Opinions
expressed as opinions on a forum called opinion are libel.

Strawman.

s******

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:58:41 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:41:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:25:34 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Would it be a good thing if I were able to spend a week each
listening to and analyzing both systems before responding? In the
sense that my opinion would have basis rooted in detailed personal
experience, yes. However in the newsgroup context, the person
asking the question would have very likely moved on and never seen
my response two weeks after he asked his question. Also the chances
that any of us would have the opportunity to actually do a detailed
evaluation like this is basically zilch.

So, you think it's better to possibly influence someone based on
*no* empirical evidence about the actual sound of the product?

I view my advice as a "yes" for Atlantic Technology.

Then you should give it a yes without putting down a speaker that
you've never heard.

Big lie #2, I didn't put down any particular Aperion Audio speaker.

Yes you did.

Or maybe you think that Atlantic Technology is the only choice to
make.

Can't read can you Weil? I said I'd rather have Atlantic Technology than
Bose and Aperion.

No you didn't. You said *this:

"Given that Aperion Audio hypes proven snake oil - namely Kimber's
"DiAural" technology, they are easy to dismiss".

And that was just the opening salvo.

I guess in Weil World, there are just three speaker
manufacturers, Atlantic Technology, Bose and Aperion.

Therefore, you can tell us all about *your* Atlantic Technology
speakers. You know, the ones you've bought because they are better
than all others.

Inability to read and comprehend simple English noted.

Noted that you haven't put your money where your mouth is. In fact,
it's even questionable whether you've ever heard Atlantic Technology
speakers.

Boy, if this is 'science", frankly, I'm not sure I want any part of
it.

I'm sure you want no part of science whatsoever, Weil, You've as
much as said so here weekly for what 4 years?

I *am* a fan of the appropriate use of commas.

Too bad you aren't rigorous about English style in your own posts, Weil.

Whatever "English style" is supposed to be. You passing judgment about
English style is like a cottonmouth talking about rat preservation.

Another example of your hypocrisy.

And I'm a fan of science that's actually science, not your bizarro
snake oil version.

If irony killed...

You'd be long dead.

dave weil said:

I wonder how many non-working components Arnold might have in his
possession.

In his possession, or on his body? :-)

"dave weil" wrote in message


I wonder how many non-working components Arnold might have in his
possession.

Very few. I set the few remaining ones I knew about out with the garbage
last night.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:57:57 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message


I wonder how many non-working components Arnold might have in his
possession.

Very few. I set the few remaining ones I knew about out with the garbage
last night.

Well then, I would say the same thing. I have very few non-working
components. And those few that I have can be repaired. Apparently,
you're able to destroy your gear quite completely.

I said



Calling you on your
dismissal of an entire line of products based on prejudice rather
than empirical experience was not a mistake.




Arny said




You call it prejudice, I call it analysis.


I said



Well, if there was any analysis going on you did it in private.


Arny said




Well, dooh. Where is it written that I have to post a detailed analysis of
my thought processes everytime I post an opinion?


Once you did it proved that I was right all along. Your dismissal was pure
prejudice. Of course most normal people would offer some explanation to begin
with.


I said



All you offered was conclusions about a product line you have never
heard.


Arny said




I you look at the thread, nobody who posts here has ever heard it, including
yourself sockpuppet wheel.


Yeah, no **** Sherlock. That's why nobody else commented on the product. If you
don't know what the **** you are talking about try shutting the **** up for a
change. You will end up with less egg on your face.


I said




Without any description of your analysis I have to call it
prejudice.


Arny said



It's like you to always presume the worst about everybody except the members
of your clique, who can do no wrong

No Arny. I had good reason. You made reference to a difference in beliefs you
have with the makers of those speakers. That was an obvious tip off that you
were slamming something based on your idiotic audio agenda rather than for any
good reasons. You were called on your bull****. That is the bottom line. So far
presuming the worst about you makes anyone look like a prophet. Unlike the
speakers you disparaged based on prejudice rather than experience you do have a
vivid track record.

I said



If you can cite any specific elements of the design you
think would cause the entire line to be dismissed based on experience
with other speakers that share those same alleged design flaws that
would constitute analysis and may show your position has merit.


Arny said




Still having problems with adding two and two I see.


Still trying to rationalize your ****ting on a company based on pure prejudice
I see.

Arny said



No self-respecting speaker designer or marketing person who follows the news
should be unaware of the unfavorable reception of the technical community to
Kimber's claims about his DiAural crossover design. Furthermore, anybody who
really understands how speakers work and reads Kimber's claims for "DiAural"
should know that they're the audio equivalent of an engine with 110%
efficiency.


No matter how you paint your venomous prejudice it still comes out as venomous
prejudice. Pathetic.


I said



it doesn't take a rocket science to see my general objection was to
your dismissal of a product line without any actual experience with
the product.


Arny said



Right, but in the face of it, what do we have to go on that's useful?


Nothing. That is why everyone else wisely chose not to open their mouths and
shove their feet in them. Obviously your ego and your hatred wouldn't allow you
to do the sensible thing. Nothing new there. It was those same character flaws
that got you sued by me.


I said




My mistaken presumption about the cause of your
prejudice against this product line does not change the broader
problem I see with your dismissal.


Arny said




Yes, you are a very self-righteous and hypocritical person sockpuppet Wheel.

Is this another example of your analysis skills? It follows the same pathology.
Form prejudicial opinions based on hatred and a lack of real knowledge and
experience.


Arny said




You have a long track record of setting up impossible hurdles for people you
don't like while tolerating and even congratulating highly egregious
behavior by yourself and people that you do like.


What a load of crap. i asked you to cite any proof of this bull**** in the last
post. obviously you found nothing. The standards such as don't comment on the
sound of something you haven't heard or, in this case, don't dismiss an entire
speaker line you haven't heard, are standards I set for myself and everyone
else. Try to find one example of your ridiculous claim about me setting hurdles
that are impossibly high. I realize you have lived the life of a chronic
underachiever who, admittedly, has never excelled at anything, but I fail to
see how even a mediocre person would find my standards of conduct so
unachievable. Maybe if you had a little self-control and were not so driven by
hatred and ego (ironic given your admissions of never excelling at anything)
you wouldn't find my standards so difficult at all.



Arny said




You know, I was over on the http://www.stereotimes.com/ web site thinking:
"I'll bet sockpuppet wheel eats this crap up for breakfast, lunch, and
dinner and thinks it's just great.


Obviously you are spending to much time fantasizing about me. Stop it. It's
creepy.


Arny said


As they say, living well is the best
revenge.


But for those who don't live well and don't excel at anything and are
overwhelmed by hatred and ego dismissing products out of pure prejudice,
accusing people of pedophilia and drug addiction and a long list of other
things you do on a regular basis are the only alternative. Please try living
well for a change. Here is a clue, 90,000+ posts on Usenent is sure sign of not
living well. I know you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer but even you
should be able to do the math.

At least by now the original poster should have a better idea on the cause for
arny to dismiss a line of speakers. it had nothing to do with what they sound
like.