About Us

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is a
fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
known to this author will not be accepted for addition.

Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:

1. "Tweaks", or minor adjustments, to audio reproduction systems, that he
claims work by methods other than those known to acoustical physics and
electronics.

2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and
electronics.

Mr. Graham has said, "I do have tweaks for glasses, including aspecial cream
that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the sound you hear from your
audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap." This
statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
product. We do not know the specifics of this interest, if there is one.

It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
unmitigated fraud. This has resulted in a thread heavily into adhominem
attacks between Middius and Weil, on one side, and Mr. Graham on the other.

The author of this post, Robert Morein, has asked Mr. Graham for an
explanation of how this cream works. Mr. Graham responded by stating that my
knowledge of science is not current, and therefore, that I am incapable of
understanding the "theory", which involves quantum mechanics. I responded
that my knowledge of science is current, and that I am very familiar with
quantum mechanics. Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me,
because the "theory" is proprietary. Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented.

Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.

Several questions present themselves:
1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels
b. His offering of the "cream".

3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work?
b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?

All of you are invited to respond: John Atkinson, Arny, Mike McKelvy, Sander
deWaal, George Middius, Dave Weil, Andre Jute, Ludovic Mirabel, Paul Packer,
Trevor Wilson, Francois Yves LeGal, "Shhhh! I'm Listening", Scott Wheeler,
Jenn, Bret Ludwig, Howard Ferstler, "Fella", "Walt",
"Goofball_star_dot_etal", etal

The results will be tallied, excluding individuals I do not know, to avoid
"rigging."
PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.

Robert Morein said:

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels

Nobody, including Shovels, believes there is any merit to such activities.

b. His offering of the "cream".

Shovels clearly has a talent for BSing. The "cream" idea seems to have just
popped out of his overactive cerebellum when he saw somebody say "speaker
placement".

3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work?

No.

b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?

Not a fraud, just a mischief maker.

PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.

That's "ad hominem", Bobo.

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said:

That's "ad hominem", Bobo.

If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) Â©

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

Robert Morein wrote:

Several questions present themselves:
1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No he does not sell anything, IMO. I beleive he has been abusive and
confrontational with almost everbody here, that's not the hallmark of a
salesman, IMO.

2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels

Now why would you think anyone would have any kind of a differing
opinion on that stuff?

b. His offering of the "cream".

I guess I missed this one, cream, I'll look it up, I don't really read
his mile long rants anymore.

3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work?

Yes, I beleive he sincerely beleives all that stuff. His over-defensive
and bitter attacking stance tells of a man ridiculed all his life for
beleiving in and actively and shamelessly advocating such unconventional
(read: looney tunes) stuff like that.

b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?

If 3a = yes, then 3b = no, else reverse.

BTW: SHP, when I called that spanish guy a troll I was not taking a
stance on whether or not directionality exists in cables. His initial
post had all the ingredients to start up a cockfight between the so
called borgs and normals, exotic high end stuff endorsed by a high end
"ragazine" leaving him cold was supposed to be the boiling point, a borg
was supposed to come out saying look what those ragazines make people
buy, etc, and us normals were supposed to start defending the high end
exotica, etc, and the directionality of his rca's was the icing on the
cake, as it were. We were to have a bout and he was to snicker there on
the sidelines. He was confirming this scenario with his dumb "Hav'nt
seen so much bitching since I saw a couple of women knock seven bells
out of each other in my local bar" too eager, too early victory rant.

Sander deWaal said:

That's "ad hominem", Bobo.

If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) ©

Spoken like a tweako-freako nitwit. Didn't you say you love tube gear,
Clyde? When I think of tubes, my blood pressure shoots up. Get a life.
Learn to write. Arnii is a very smart guy.

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

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

Robert Morein said:

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Whether this is a complete statement of the facts of the matter is up for
question. If the contents of the newsletter are, in the vast preponderance,
favorable to the interests of PWB, then it is irrelevant whether the Belts
exercise control over it.

In his correspondence with me, Mr. Graham has given his credentials as a
Ph.D in applied mathematics from the University of Leeds. However, he states
in http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/intro.html that "My own background in
Medicine, Child Development Research and Psychological Treatments influenced
my decision to start the Newsletter."

"Robert Morein" said:

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

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

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited
and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?

Sander, may I have your help in keeping this thread on topic? We could do
that one next.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

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

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would
like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited
and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?

Sander, may I have your help in keeping this thread on topic? We could do
that one next.

Bob, Could you please flag your psychotic inquisitions as OT...
or at least RD... (really dumb)?

I'm a bit busy of late. Thanks,

ScottW

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

Robert Morein said:

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics.

I must have missed part of your evidence trail. I thought you deduced
Shovels is Graham *because* of that citation on the PWB site. Is there an
independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?

To my mind, however, whether Graham is Shovels doesn't necessarily affect
the issue of fraudulence. Yes, there's a Web site that purports to sell
various items. Two buts to consider: First, there's no independent
evidence that anybody has actually bought any of that stuff. Second,
Shovels (whether it's Graham or somebody else) has not tried to sell the
stuff on RAO, and it wasn't Shovels who posted the link to the Belts' site
-- it was you. So even if you have a dead-certain ID of Shovels as Graham,
you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.

If he is here hoping to get some pub for his site...Morein is as usual,
unwittingly abetting his efforts.

BTW...nice to see you had a good nap.

ScottW

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

Robert Morein said:

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics.

I must have missed part of your evidence trail. I thought you deduced
Shovels is Graham *because* of that citation on the PWB site. Is there an
independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?

There is this:

To my mind, however, whether Graham is Shovels doesn't necessarily affect
the issue of fraudulence. Yes, there's a Web site that purports to sell
various items. Two buts to consider: First, there's no independent
evidence that anybody has actually bought any of that stuff. Second,
Shovels (whether it's Graham or somebody else) has not tried to sell the
stuff on RAO, and it wasn't Shovels who posted the link to the Belts' site
-- it was you. So even if you have a dead-certain ID of Shovels as Graham,
you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.

Just to be clear, I am not trying to show anything. The evidence is the

Robert Morein said:

Is there an independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?

It appears most likely that "Soundhaspriority" is actually one Richard
Graham, who gives his address as 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE, with an
email of .

Fine, you sussed me out.

OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)

you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.

I'm not trying to show that he has. I am intrigued by the sudden switch from
apparently innocent suggestions, to, "I do have tweaks for glasses,
including aspecial cream that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the
sound you hear from your audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap."

This sounds like a commercial solicitation.

More like a possible prelude to a solicitation.

I wonder if there was once a real person named Jamie Benchimol.....

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

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

Rather, I believe he is
an egomaniac and a troll whose only interest is provoking
people into frenzied exchanges of insults and
unresolvable verbal combat.

Kind of like George Middius, eh?

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

Robert Morein said:

Is there an independent link between the Graham person and the RAO
persona?

It appears most likely that "Soundhaspriority" is actually one Richard
Graham, who gives his address as 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE, with
an
email of .

Fine, you sussed me out.

OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)

Why do you need me to bring some sense into your senseless
existence? Let me guess... you're allying with Morein so you
exercise your mommyf'er schtick again?
Sure..that makes sense.

ScottW

A dialect more cryptic than Krooglish, and from another self-styled
"engineer". ;-)

OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)

Why do you need me to bring some sense into your senseless
existence?

Is that what I said? I'll bet Krooger loves you for paraphrasing my words.

Let me guess... you're allying with Morein so you
exercise your mommyf'er schtick again?
Sure..that makes sense.

If that makes sense, I'd guess you must have been conked on the head
again. Hope you recover.

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

wrote:
I'm sorry to say that but the mere fact that the RAO
stalwarts are taking time
to debate this stuff is high comedy of a theatre of the absurd
variety.. There is a French
term for two people who share delusions: "folie a deux". This is folie
a dozen or more,
I don't thinh he's trying to sell anything. The idea that anyone would
buy this
passeth my understanding. But then didn't someone once sell pebbles by
mail?
Ludovic Mirabel

The frightening part is, if he were trying to sell something it would
at least be proof of his sanity. As it is, we have only proof to the
contrary. When he first started posting, I took it for a joke and was
just about to join in. Then I realized he was serious and instantly
went into shock. I would have recovered by now, for I recover well from
psychic trauma, except that rational, intelligent people, who staunchly
resist notions like, say, that a great spiritual teacher was put to
death two thousand years ago, are prepared to seriously examine ideas
far more far-fetched because some goose cunningly pricks their egos and
challenges them to broaden their horizons. Well, I for one intend to
keep my horizons narrow, and my sanity intact, and regale Mr. Sound's
tweaks with the howls of laughter they so richly deserve.

Robert Morein wrote:

Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
...
2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and electronics.
.....
Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.

Here's the crap, uh I mean cream, in question. written about by Greg Weaver in
Soundstage way back when:
http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize071999.htm

And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original article by
Weaver:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=...eak+cream+foil

BTW, it appears Weaver lost his credibility and his gig at Soundstage following
this brouhaha.

GeoSynch

"GeoSynch" wrote in message
ink.net...
Robert Morein wrote:

Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
...
2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to
improve audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and
electronics.
....
Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.

Here's the crap, uh I mean cream, in question. written about by Greg
Weaver in
Soundstage way back when:
http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize071999.htm

And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original
article by Weaver:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=...eak+cream+foil

BTW, it appears Weaver lost his credibility and his gig at Soundstage
following this brouhaha.

GeoSynch
Thanks for the additional info. What do you think Mr. Graham personally
believes? Do you think he has a commercial interest in the "cream" ?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

Thanks for the additional info. What do you think Mr.
Graham personally believes?

Of course not.

Do you think he has a
commercial interest in the "cream" ?

I seriously doubt that a truely commercial interest (i.e., significant
profit) is even possible.

Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that come
from?

much snippage

To answer the question:

SHP is a troll. He's made pretty solid foes out of everybody on
both sides of the aisle. He has no consistent point
of view, he just likes to argue and hurl abuse.

In partitular, don't think for a minute that he's a
subjectivist and believes in the tweaks he presents -
I mean, c'mon a picture of a four legged animal
slipped under your amp? He just posts them to send up
the "magic clock" people.

Basicaly, he's like the clown in the dunk tank at the
fair. It doesn't matter what insults he hurls or who
he directs them at - the important part is to get
everybody to line up and pay for a shot at him. And
when you hit the mark and dunk him in the tank (which
happpens *alot*) he just gets back up and continues
where he left off.

Which is to say, don't take him seriously. He's a
clown. If you want to take a whack at his human
pinata impersonation, by all means go ahead. But
don't let him get your goat.

//Walt

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:10:24 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
unmitigated fraud.

That is not the case at all. I don't really give him any credence,
since he doesn't seem to know very much about audio products based on
his ignorance of turntable grounding straps. Since he decided to
attack me virtually out of the blue, I've decided to toy with him for
a while, giving him a bit back what he's inflicted on the newsgroup.
But I also wouldn't call him a fraud, just a troller.

I did go the the Belt newsletter to see what he was prattling about,
and it's obvious that those folks only buy into tweaks when it comes
from their little club (you know, the one with the secret handshake).
They can believe that applying a stain-removing chemical to a small
spot on a table can seriously impact the sound of a system (and as
long as they believe it does, I maintain that it *does* affect the
sound, because you can't separate the mind from the sound once the
mind has decided something sounds the way it does), but he can't buy
into the idea that placing four tuned and braced wooden enclosures can
affect the sound of a system simply because someone else sussed out
that particular tweak.

So it's fun to play with the guy just to see how wild off-the-mark he
can get. He doesn't get references to Jonathan Swift and he doesn't
understand the comic use of a homophone. So he's a rather dull little
boy indeed. And now he's decended into the IKWYABWAI territory. He's
following a pretty predictable curve. I'd imagine that he's just
whiling away a typical dull British pre-spring.

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:10:24 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels
b. His offering of the "cream".

My opinion is that tweaks work if you believe in them. And I've
thought that it's a subtext of his point all along, whether he
explictly is intending it or not.

I don't think he's "offering the cream", except to offer it as a way
to intrude on YOUR "tweak". He can't stand to be left out in the cold.

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:12:18 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:

Sander deWaal said:

That's "ad hominem", Bobo.

If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) ©

Spoken like a tweako-freako nitwit.

Plus, he's a homophonephobe.

Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that come
from?

much snippage

To answer the question:

SHP is a troll. He's made pretty solid foes out of everybody on
both sides of the aisle. He has no consistent point
of view, he just likes to argue and hurl abuse.

In partitular, don't think for a minute that he's a
subjectivist and believes in the tweaks he presents -
I mean, c'mon a picture of a four legged animal
slipped under your amp? He just posts them to send up
the "magic clock" people.

Basicaly, he's like the clown in the dunk tank at the
fair. It doesn't matter what insults he hurls or who
he directs them at - the important part is to get
everybody to line up and pay for a shot at him. And
when you hit the mark and dunk him in the tank (which
happpens *alot*) he just gets back up and continues
where he left off.

Which is to say, don't take him seriously. He's a
clown. If you want to take a whack at his human
pinata impersonation, by all means go ahead. But
don't let him get your goat.

//Walt

"footlong" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person
who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
come
from?

His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE,
with an
email of .

This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
reposted further up in this thread.

much snippage

To answer the question:

SHP is a troll. He's made pretty solid foes out of everybody on
both sides of the aisle. He has no consistent point
of view, he just likes to argue and hurl abuse.

In partitular, don't think for a minute that he's a
subjectivist and believes in the tweaks he presents -
I mean, c'mon a picture of a four legged animal
slipped under your amp? He just posts them to send up
the "magic clock" people.

Basicaly, he's like the clown in the dunk tank at the
fair. It doesn't matter what insults he hurls or who
he directs them at - the important part is to get
everybody to line up and pay for a shot at him. And
when you hit the mark and dunk him in the tank (which
happpens *alot*) he just gets back up and continues
where he left off.

Which is to say, don't take him seriously. He's a
clown. If you want to take a whack at his human
pinata impersonation, by all means go ahead. But
don't let him get your goat.

Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship with
PWB.
So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?

Robert Morein wrote:

And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original article
by Weaver:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=...eak+cream+foil

Thanks for the additional info. What do you think Mr. Graham personally
believes? Do you think he has a commercial interest in the "cream" ?

He must be seriously down on his luck if he's still trying to peddle those
potions
and lotions seven years hence. As they say, what's old is new.

GeoSynch

GeoSynch wrote:
Robert Morein wrote:

Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
...
2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and electronics.
....
Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.

Here's the crap, uh I mean cream, in question. written about by Greg Weaver in
Soundstage way back when:
http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize071999.htm

And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original article by
Weaver:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=...eak+cream+foil

BTW, it appears Weaver lost his credibility and his gig at Soundstage following
this brouhaha.

So, the question, 'how much of a credulous boob do you have to be to get fired
from an audiophile publication' now has an answer?

___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

Robert Morein wrote:

"footlong" wrote in message
...

Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person
who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
come
from?

His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE,
with an
email of .

This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
reposted further up in this thread.

much snippage

Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship with
PWB.
So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?

Who? Richard Graham, or SHP? I'm not convinced that they're the same
person. Your evidence is that you accused SHP of being Richard Graham,
and SHP said "Fine, you sussed me out." But I'm quite sure that if I
accused SHP of being the Queen of England he'd tell me that he was.

Didn't you ever come across one of those logic puzzles where everybody
from a certain island always lies, another always tells the truth and
another is completely random? Dealing with him is kind of like that.

OTOH, it appears likely that SHP has been reading the pwb website.
What's not clear is whether Richard Graham himself believes the crap he
writes or whether the whole thing is just an elaborate practical joke.

//Walt

"Walt" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

"footlong" wrote in message
...

Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same
person who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
come
from?

His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17
6NE, with an
email of .

This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
reposted further up in this thread.

much snippage

Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship
with PWB.
So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?

Who? Richard Graham, or SHP? I'm not convinced that they're the same
person. Your evidence is that you accused SHP of being Richard Graham,
and SHP said "Fine, you sussed me out." But I'm quite sure that if I
accused SHP of being the Queen of England he'd tell me that he was.

Walt, read this:
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...o%20Web%20Site,
written by Richard Graham
The phrase "sound has priority" occurs three times.
In this link, http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...1/vol0301.html
the phrase occurs six times.
Mr. Richard Graham believes very strongly that affixing a foil sticker
imprinted with the phrase "sound has priority" on the face of audio
equipment, improves the sound. He writes about this extensively. The
indivdual posting as "soundhaspriority" admits that he is that person. Also,
the person posting is unusually voluble. Individuals capable of posting with
his use of language are extremely rare. I am myself a writer, and it is my
judgement that the subtext and style of the newsletters conforms very
closely to the posts. In private correspondence with Mr. Graham, he has not
denied that he is "soundhaspriority."

Somewhere else in this forum, someone reposted some text, author Richard
Graham, where Mr. Graham states that he has adopted the pseudonym
"soundhaspriority", presumably as an extension of what he believes. For if
one believes that sticking a piece of foil with the name on it has power,
then one can certainly believe in the power of the name.

Walt, I don't know if I've satisfied you, but this is the best that usenet
can provide. Only the power of the subpoena can do better, but subpoena is
available on for filed suits. Here in the U.S., you may be interested to
know, a person can be convicted of murder, solely on the basis of
circumstantial evidence. No body, fingerprints, blood, or DNA is required.
It happened two years ago; the man was sentenced to life in prison. The term
"circumstantial" is sometimes used as derogatory to the information, but it
is actually just a classification, one that is still taken seriously by the
law.

"Robert Morein" said:

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited
and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?

Sander, may I have your help in keeping this thread on topic? We could do
that one next.

My post was/is entirely on topic.
It is an answer to your questions, in the form of a question, if you
(choose to) look carefully enough.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

Robert Morein wrote:
"Walt" wrote in message
Mr. Morein,
May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.

...
Robert Morein wrote:

"footlong" wrote in message
...

Robert Morein wrote:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."

Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same
person who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
come
from?

His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17
6NE, with an
email of .

This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
reposted further up in this thread.

much snippage

Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship
with PWB.
So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?

Who? Richard Graham, or SHP? I'm not convinced that they're the same
person. Your evidence is that you accused SHP of being Richard Graham,
and SHP said "Fine, you sussed me out." But I'm quite sure that if I
accused SHP of being the Queen of England he'd tell me that he was.

Walt, read this:
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...o%20Web%20Site,
written by Richard Graham
The phrase "sound has priority" occurs three times.
In this link, http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...1/vol0301.html
the phrase occurs six times.
Mr. Richard Graham believes very strongly that affixing a foil sticker
imprinted with the phrase "sound has priority" on the face of audio
equipment, improves the sound. He writes about this extensively. The
indivdual posting as "soundhaspriority" admits that he is that person. Also,
the person posting is unusually voluble. Individuals capable of posting with
his use of language are extremely rare. I am myself a writer, and it is my
judgement that the subtext and style of the newsletters conforms very
closely to the posts. In private correspondence with Mr. Graham, he has not
denied that he is "soundhaspriority."

Somewhere else in this forum, someone reposted some text, author Richard
Graham, where Mr. Graham states that he has adopted the pseudonym
"soundhaspriority", presumably as an extension of what he believes. For if
one believes that sticking a piece of foil with the name on it has power,
then one can certainly believe in the power of the name.

Walt, I don't know if I've satisfied you, but this is the best that usenet
can provide. Only the power of the subpoena can do better, but subpoena is
available on for filed suits. Here in the U.S., you may be interested to
know, a person can be convicted of murder, solely on the basis of
circumstantial evidence. No body, fingerprints, blood, or DNA is required.
It happened two years ago; the man was sentenced to life in prison. The term
"circumstantial" is sometimes used as derogatory to the information, but it
is actually just a classification, one that is still taken seriously by the
law.

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

1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he
sells?
If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.

Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newslett...2/vol0202.html

It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would
like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited
and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."

Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?

Sander, may I have your help in keeping this thread on topic? We could do
that one next.

My post was/is entirely on topic.
It is an answer to your questions, in the form of a question, if you
(choose to) look carefully enough.

Ah, those Zen Koans!

wrote in message
ups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
"Walt" wrote in message
Mr. Morein,
May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.

It does seem that Mr. Graham engages in what mental health practitioners
refer to as "magical thinking." However, I wonder if that in isolation is
indicative of psychosis. Wouldn't one have to classify all lottery ticket
buyers, and more-than-occasional gamblers, as insane?

Ludo said:

Mr. Morein,
May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.

Ludo, I have great respect for your insights and acumen on the subject of
testing, as does, I believe, Robert. However, the topic that seems to me
to be nearest to your heart, the efficacy and pertinence of DBTs to
consumer audio, is as far removed from the core subject of this newsgroup
as are our speculations about the looney "soundhaspriority". What do you
mean? I can imagine you asking. I mean that no Normal person has any faith
in a mystical process of "tests" for selecting audio gear because its
procedures and results are wholly, completely, and utterly irrelevant to
that task. You continue to "debate" the idiot 'borgs on the subject for
your own amusement. You will never persuade any of Them to stop their
empty preaching, any more than They will persuade a Normal to forego his
senses and emotional responses to music in favor of a bloodless, otiose,
dehumanizing "test". (It's worth noting again that among that tribe of
true believers we know as the Hive, only one or two of them have ever
participated in any DBTs of any sort at any time in their pathetic lives.
Maybe only one, in fact, now that Nousiane has disappeared from Usenet.)

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

Robert Morein said:

It does seem that Mr. Graham engages in what mental health practitioners
refer to as "magical thinking." However, I wonder if that in isolation is
indicative of psychosis. Wouldn't one have to classify all lottery ticket
buyers, and more-than-occasional gamblers, as insane?

The chance of winning (1 in 10,000,000, or whatever) is not imaginary.
It's only demented if one seriously expects to win against such odds.

--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

Robert Morein, and his many personalities, postulated:

There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is a
fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
known to this author will not be accepted for addition.

Thank you for this obsessive deconstruction of me, Mr. Morein. You've
made my job a lot, lot easier. You've demonstrated proof in black and
white, of a number of observations that I've made. Which include
these:

A. You're a troll, and not a mentally stable one at that. And despite
the many hats you wear, you're nevertheless a troll with a heck of a
lot of free time, and an obsessive personality disorder.

B. Your so-called "fact finding mission" about me, looks more like the
Spanish Inquisition. Or a witch hunt. It, and the responses to it, has
given me more laughs than I've had in years. Perhaps it looks like
"the Spanish Inquisition" because your belief system is modelled after
the religious approach, as it is with the rest of RAO. What I mean by
that is that while you or may not sincerely be attempting to seek the
truth about me ("why" you have such an obession with me is another
issue entirely between you and your psychiatrist...), you are perfectly
content with accepting personal opinions from any random number of
ignorant fools, including yourself, as "the truth". "Opinions" (in the
form of conjecture, heresay, etc.) are not "proven facts". They're
the equivalent of centuries-old fables, like you find in the Bible, by
coincidence. The non-thinking "sheep" (what I affectionately call you
and the other members here) mindlessly gobble up whatever "faux facts"
(opinions) they are spoon-fed, and they believe it without question.
You and the rest of the group don't even exhibit the capability to
discern what is and isn't a proven fact. This despite your 7 phd's,
your engineering and scientific background. Instead, you believe that
anything that "smells like a fact", such as Goofball claiming that
after finding a picture on the internet of an old lady behind her car
he has properly identified me, must be a fact.

Little Georgie (Middius), the troll you called a "mosquito" to me (and
which I agreed with your assessment of George), can for example, be
seen proving how this process works in this very thread. First, he
believed what Goofball said about me being Mrs. Belt. Which means he
didn't believe I was who I said I was. Like the true imbecile George
is, he kept referring to this picture in addressing me. Continually
reinforcing what a mindless fool he is, in doing so. But when you gave
him enough "evidence" that I was Graham, "evidence" that was never
evidence because it was simply another Goofball-esque "revelation" that
you never verified, George gobbled up your sheep chow, like the good
little non-thinker that he is. And so the pattern goes. I must have
seen at least 100 false allegations made about me before this thread.
Allegations that were never proven, but yet, perceived as "the TRUTH"
by the mindless sheep you find on RAO. There must be at least 100 more
in this thread alone! Besides you of course, Elmi..., Paul Packer,
GeoSynch, Dave Weill, Arny Krueger, ScottW, Fella, Middius,
"Footlong"/Walt, and Steven "Hey guys, I'm A Scientisisist!" Sullivan
can so far be counted among this (in this single thread alone) who have
all made false presumptions about me. And the thread appears to just be
getting off the ground! There's only one person out of all the
respondents that didn't say anything false about me in this thread.
See if you're smart enough to guess who that is? LOL!

Hint: Out of all those I dealt with on this group, he's consistently
made the least false presumptions about me. Note that I consider the
"smart" people in our society, as those who make the least presumptions
(hence the reason I consider most people I've seen here either
"imbeciles", or "true imbeciles"). Not merely those who posess the most
"knowledge", because they've studied some field or other. Because
"knowledge" is not "truth" per se, it is merely "what is known". What
may be "known" may not be "true", or does not negate other "truths"
that may seem to overlap what is known. There is a quality to
information. "Knowing" something which isn't true, is more than just
"worthless knowledge". Because it now represents "truth" in the mind of
those who accept lies as truth, but as it is a lie, it takes you
further away from the truth, and filling your mind with quality
information. Much better to be ignorant of what is true while remaining
open to the truth, than to be ignorant of the truth and have a mind
poisoned with lies, that leaves little place for truth to reside, when
it happens along. So those who are the most careful about making false
presumptions about things (ie. those who don't arrogantly dismiss
ideas they know nothing about and haven't even experimented with),
are the one's most likely to be smarter and/or wiser than the rest of
the flock. They won't have minds filled with false presumptions
(lies), and therefore closed to valid information (truth). Following my
premise, there is of course nothing stupider than to believe that you
are on a "truth seeking inquiry", when your protocol is to query a chat
group of belligerent ne'er do wells, who couldn't possibly be more
biased and prejudiced on the subject you raise, for opinions on a
person they've never met and know nothing about. But nevertheless
have no shortage of "truth" to impart over.

This speaks to a greater issue, of course, because it has always been
my contention that you and the rest of RAO use this same "religious"
approach in your understanding of audio. That is to say, you believe
whatever "truth" you are given (directly or by what you read,
indirectly), rather than finding out for yourself what is and isn't
true. Or dismissing opinions if you can't. You're ALL skeptical of
EVERYTHING, except what you have already "bought" as "the truth". In
the case of the objectivist camp, "the TRUTH" they have bought is that
just about "everything in audio sounds the same". In the case of the
subjectivists, "the TRUTH" they have bought is "things sound different,
but only the things that the majority of consumers believe sounds
different. If we never heard of it, or if it sounds implausible, it's
bogus". This is precisely what you've made of the tweaks I generously
gave you, and precisely why you will never understand much of what is
and isn't true in audio. Or in life, for that matter, since this
approach you all take is one that rules your lives. And rather petty
lives at that, I must say, judging by this thread and the level of
"conversation" it has generated, and that in most others.

C. This newsgroup is FILLED TO THE BRIM with hyper-paranoid, insecure
social misfits, who apparently have nothing better going on in their
lives, that they have to spend their days coming up with endless
theories of conjecture about someone they keep saying should be
ignored, and that they have no interest in. After a day of not reading
this group, I see a new thread about me with 35 posts in it so far,
that proves me right again.

So I can't wait to see what happens at the end of this "fact finding
mission of yours", when you tally all the so-called "facts" about me,
from the people on your list that you consider "credible", and then try
to arrive at a "factual conclusion", which you've foolishly convinced
yourself is "the truth". Had you any idea what a fool you are, Robert,
you'd understand why I'm laughing so hard at you and the rest of
your friends in this thread.

Let me see how good you're doing so far, on this "fact finding
mission" of yours!.....

Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:

1. "Tweaks", or minor adjustments, to audio reproduction systems, that he
claims work by methods other than those known to acoustical physics and
electronics.

Oh well. That's wrong to begin with. Bad start on your fact-finding
journey! Not the first time you've claimed to interpret my position
and gotten it wrong either (remember when you ignorantly said all my
audio concepts are based on "Eastern" philosophies? And when other RAO
members believe you, simply because you said that?).

I DO NOT believe that "tweaks" are "minor adjustments". I only believe
that YOUR tweaks are. Mine can be much more significant in the changes
they provide, than changing a completely different audio component.
I'd hardly be able to transform the entire sound of my system, as I
have, with "minor adjustments".

2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and
electronics.

Wow, you finally got one teeny tiny thing right, in your brilliant
interpretations. Pure accident on your part, no doubt.

Mr. Graham has said, "I do have tweaks for glasses, including aspecial cream
that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the sound you hear from your
audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap." This
statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
product. We do not know the specifics of this interest, if there is one.

Gosh, and you were doing so well in the first part of no. 2..... Well,
here's where you prove that you belong on this newsgroup, Bob. And I
wish you and the rest of the sheep, a happy life together.

It's been my observation that most people on this group are insecure
and paranoid, and you've just proven that about yourself, except you
have many more "psychological difficulties" than the average RAO
regular. You take a statement that I make about a product as a
"suggestion that I have a proprietary interest in it". Well, as we all
now know thanks to me, a "suggestion" is enough for the fools on RAO to
accept as "the RAO TRUTH". So once having made a "suggestion", you then
go on to say that "we" ("we" being RAO presumably, and not all the
voices in your head battling for air time), "do not know the specifics
of this interest". And would you believe that there are some who still
don't understand how a pious carpenter from Nazareth could be hailed
the world over as "the son of a God", for over 2000 years?

And with all these religious beliefs of yours Bob, you say you don't
believe in Jesus? There's a lot more evidence to "suggest" (one of
your favourite terms....) that Jesus existed, than there is in your
ridiculously stupid conjecture. How "ridiculously stupid" are you,
exactly? Here's an example:

Every single person on this newsgroup who EVER advocated ANY product in
audio, let's say Near 50m speakers, suggests they have a "proprietary
interest in the product". According to your idiotic logic, or lack
thereof, that would make you and everyone else here a shill. Welcome to
the Shill's Club, Robert.

I take it back, Francois Yves Le Imbecile was right about you. You ARE
a moron.

It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
unmitigated fraud.

So do you (if the 5000 accusations of "liar!" that you wrote about me
are to believed), and so do most people here. Except that Weill and
Middius, or anybody else for that matter, never proved that I was a
fraud. They only spew the same BS that everyone does. I however, _have_
proven that Weill and Middius are BOTH frauds. I proved this about
Weill in a post I made today, and I proved this to you about Middius,
after having sent you the email I sent him, which he lied to the entire
group about, saying that it contained attacks against you.

That's the difference between "the absolute TRUTH" (as shown by
valid, verifiable evidence) and "the TRUTH is it is known and believed
by RAOphiles" (ie. lies, as shown by vigorous assertion, and nothing
more).

An example of "the RAO TRUTH" would be the one by Dave "Garbage Boy"
Weill, who's most intelligent response to a debate you and I were
having about this cream product that you have such a hard-on about, was
"That's a load of total bumkum" (sic). I assumed he was talking to me
since he addressed my post, but I did consider the fact that he could
have just been talking to his good pal, George the Greek, over other
activities they had "just shared together".

This has resulted in a thread heavily into adhominem
attacks between Middius and Weil, on one side, and Mr. Graham on the other.

And don't forget you with your "DON'T CREAM!" warning thread and
other attack threads against me, which include ad hominem attacks of
your own.

The author of this post, Robert Morein, has asked Mr. Graham for an
explanation of how this cream works.

I like the way you refer to yourself in the third person, Robert. It
makes the question of your sanity even less of a controversy, in case
anyone still doubts that about you. I can see now that I was wrong to
have given in to your pleas in email that I retract what you had said
to me about having tried my tweak, because of how it would compromise
your position with the IEEE, and McCarty breathing down your neck. I
lied on your behalf over what you said to me about having tried the
L-shape tweak and found that it did make a difference, because you
asked me to do so as a friend, and because I thought you had some
integrity, and I respected that. But now after all these lies you're
trying to make up about me, I see that I was wrong about you. I don't
see much difference between you being a lunatic and a troll, and your
arch-nemesis, Brian McCarty. You're a sick enough puppy that for all
I know, you ARE "Brian McCarty". aka "The other guy Robert has an
obsession with".

Go on, Morein. Send me some more emails threatening litigation for
having briefly mentioned that you tried the L-shape tweak, and found
that you did hear a change. See how much I care about that. I will
simply show the court the email you sent in which you made the
observation, along with the IP address of your ISP. You'll be laughed
out of the house, Robert, before it ever gets to trial.

Mr. Graham responded by stating that my
knowledge of science is not current, and therefore, that I am incapable of
understanding the "theory", which involves quantum mechanics. I responded
that my knowledge of science is current, and that I am very familiar with
quantum mechanics. Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me,
because the "theory" is proprietary. Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented.

Wrong again. You're purposefully trying to deceive. A "debating
trade" tactic which you borrowed from your friends Krueger, Weill and
Middius. My lambasting of Weill for not understanding the theory had
nothing to do with the conversation between you and me. It referred to
another concept (the 5 pinhole paper tweak) in which Weill demanded
that I present the theory for. Then when I _did_, Weill blustered, much
like you do, and pretended to understand the theory, but the fool
didn't even understand the term used in the theory. Likewise, if he
did, he would been able to debate me on it, but instead, "Garbage Boy"
Weil tucked tail and ran like the coward he is. Or maybe he just heard
the sound of garbage trucks coming, and lost interest due to the call
of his hunger. Even though I reminded him 15 times that he never had
the education or intelligence to debate me on that.

As to the cream, I never said the "theory is proprietary", that's
again a strawman argument, which you appear quite fond of. AFAIK, the
product you have such a hard-on about works on the strengths and
weaknesses of morphic resonance energy patterns. Where things went
awry, is when you started making all these false assumptions about the
product (ie. you kept insisting the word "electret" in the name meant
it was an electret!), and you either wanted or needed proprietary
information about the product, in order to address your specific
questions. I told you I was not the inventor of the product, and its
not my job in life to supply you with detailed information about a
product that you're interested in. In fact, its not my job to supply
you with any information about any product, when you can and should
damn well do the research yourself. There was a time when I would have
been happy to supply you with any information you needed, even if it
meant me doing research on your behalf. I supplied you with many such
details and web site links regarding the theories behind the concepts I
talked with you about. That was a time when you and I once "were" able
to have reasonable conversations in email about alternative audio
concepts and products.

You can believe that after your many recent malicious attacks (not
including all the other ones in which you called me a "liar" on the
group, when you knew I was telling the truth), that time has now
passed, and I'm not interested in having serious and sincere
conversations with you on audio or anything else. Nevertheless, before
this latest attack thread of yours in which you are desperately trying
to promulgate a whole host of lies about me, I was willing to reveal
to you some of my "guesses" about the product's possible composure
and nature. Things that I never told anyone, but that I was willing to
tell you, so that you might better understand what you're talking
about, and not be so obsessive and defensive about an audio product
like the cream, simply because you haven't a clue about it.
Nevertheless, I emailed this information to you, and you're still
pretending you know nothing about the product, judging by what you've
written in this attack thread, and by the fact that you never returned
my email to continue discussing the product, outside of the hostile
environment you helped create in the thread we were discussing the
product in.

Like I already told you publically, I was not willing to reveal this
information except privately, because if my findings about the product
are correct (and I have much reason to believe they are), then it would
compromise the inventor's rights to exclusive manufacture. But now
that I see your hostile reaction, maybe that's exactly what you
wanted in the first place? More information so that you could
obliterate the manufacturer's research and market a "me-too" product
yourself, that you never designed? At this point, you've proven to be
such a lying troll, I wouldn't put it past you to do that.

Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.

Several questions present themselves:
1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?

Right. Besides being a professional lunatic, it's a good thing
you're not a magistrate. But since I'm supposed to be the audio
equivalent of a "witch doctor", I guess that your little "witch hunt"
here is quite apropos. All I know is this: if I'm "guilty" of
advertising a product by the mere MENTION of it, then so are you.
You're a shill for Polk and Near loudspeakers, among other things. A
far worse shill than I, who named a product without continuing to
mention its full name or manufacturer. You gave the entire model names
and manufacturer of the loudspeakers you allegedly are trying to sell
us. (And NO, I'm not buying your crappy Polk and Near loudspeakers,
Morein. Just the kind of thing a know-nothing audiophile would buy,
because he thinks recording studios have the best and most "neutral"
equipment).

If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.

Pfffffffffffffffffttttttttt!!!!!!! ROTLFMAO!!!!!!

Now I KNOW you're insane, Robert! I'm one of the only people here
in a long time, who started trying to get the group back on topic about
subjects related to audio, with my tweak contributions. This is on a
group where 98% of the posts are all flame wars. ALL of my audio posts
were turned into attack threads, just as you have done with the
discussion on eyeglass treatments that we were having. The vast
majority of the posts here are a violation of newsgroup charter. Got a
newsflash for you Morein: RAO has long since unainmously decided it
does not give a rat's ass about the newsgroup's charter. This is no
longer an audio discussion group, its a flame war group, like
alt.flame. Audio is merely occasional background chatter here, and
there are never ANY productive discussions on audio EVER. Because of
belligerent fools like yourself.

2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:

a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels

One would have to wonder why "free tweaks" is in quotation marks, and
then reflect a little more on the lack of your sanity. Judging by all
your other paranoid theories, you probably think the government is
living in your toilet, so you "go potty" in your bed.

b. His offering of the "cream".

That's a blatant LIE now, since Google will show I offered NOTHING,
except FREE tweak ideas. In fact, because the cream is a commercial
product, and not a cheap one at that, I did not want to go into details
about it, lest I be called a "shill" again, by unscrupulous posters
such as yourself. This product was only _one_ of numerous ideas that I
mentioned could negate diffraction effects of eyeglass, and cause them
to become beneficial to the audiophile wearer. You ignored my
mentioning other ideas besides the cream product, some of which were
free. YOU are the one who kept pushing me to provide details about the
commercial cream product, Morein. At NO POINT did I ever offer the
product for sale, or give ANY details whatsoever about its commercial
availability. I did not even mention who manufactures it.

In contrast, YOU advocated people go blind and miss seeing their
favourite performer at a concert, in order to improve some
unquantifiable degree of acoustic degradation, due to the alleged
effects of the presence of your eyeglasses on acoustic pressure waves.
You advocated this, because all you ignorantly understand of the
physical world is your quaint, hundreds-of-years old archaic laws of
physics. Which is precisely why you engineers and engineer wanna-bes
(like your friends McKelvy and Krueger) are always advocating that
differences in audio are mostly insignificant. What is "insignificant"
Robert, is your knowledge of what produces good sound in audio. In
fact, I don't just question your mental competence, I'm questioning
your professional competence, here.

Well after having made a convincing performance here as an obsessive
lunatic, thank you for proving what a proven liar that you are, Robert.

3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:

a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work?

That's interesting, since you are on record as having SAID as much
yourself, that you believe the tweaks are sincere.

In fact, you even started a new thread just to declare this....

One of Robert Morein's personalities speaks:

"I have been involved in a private discussion with Soundhaspriority. I

intend to preserve the confidentiality of this discussion. However, I
would
like to tell you that it is my impression that he is not a troll. His
posts
are not mischief; they are expressions of deeply held beliefs, with
substantial philosophy behind them. While our viewpoints are
significantly
different, I accord him my respect, due to the cogency with which he
presents his beliefs, which stem from outside the Western framework of
logical thought."

Since multiple personality disorder does seem to be one of your
psychological failings, I can't say I'm a bit surprised about your
lack of consistency.

b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?

Now you're talking about me being a fraud, which seems to be one of
your favourit pet words (Google shows you calling people a "fraud" no
less than 506 times). A few days ago, you publically wrote this:

One of Robert Morein's personalities speaks:

"For the record, I have no indication, nor do I assert, that Mr.
Graham's business practices are in any way fraudulent."

Now about your latest insane accusation.... am I a "fraud" as much as
YOU are a fraud for advocating that people starve themselves to death
to improve their perception of sound, or electrocute themselves by
using a cheater plug, or that people adjust their speakers according to
mystical principles of "Feng Shui", or that eating ice cream will
render your hifi system a useless piece of junk, or any of the other
crazy ideas you advocated to RAO as "Free tweaks for TRUE
AUDIOPHILES!".

"True Audiophiles" Mr. Morein? "True Lunatics" is more like it.

All of you are invited to respond: John Atkinson, Arny, Mike McKelvy, Sander
deWaal, George Middius, Dave Weil, Andre Jute, Ludovic Mirabel, Paul Packer,
Trevor Wilson, Francois Yves LeGal, "Shhhh! I'm Listening", Scott Wheeler,
Jenn, Bret Ludwig, Howard Ferstler, "Fella", "Walt",
"Goofball_star_dot_etal", etal

The results will be tallied, excluding individuals I do not know, to avoid
"rigging."
PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.

It's "ad hominem" idiot (the study of Latin apparently not one of
your PHDs). And it certainly didn't seem to distract from your
purppose of attacking my character when you used it against me in your
posts.

Robert Morein wrote:

Robert Morein's psychotic inquiry snipped

This email I received Sat., apparently from your mother or father, goes
a long way to explaining these posts of yours, Robbie:

From: "Sylvan Morein" Add to
Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: ,
Subject: Robert
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 02:02:13 -0500

I would ask you to stop stirring up my son, Robert.

He's a sick boy. I've managed to get his medication under control
these
past few weeks and he's now pretty docile and controllable.

Don't mess it up.

Thank you for your kind assistance.

__________________________________________________ _______________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/o...ave/direct/01/

I hope you get some help before it's too late....

wrote:
Besides you of course, Elmi..., Paul Packer,
GeoSynch, Dave Weill, Arny Krueger, ScottW, Fella, Middius,
"Footlong"/Walt, and Steven "Hey guys, I'm A Scientisisist!" Sullivan
can so far be counted among this (in this single thread alone) who have
all made false presumptions about me.

Be specific... looks like you just looked at the post list and tossed
some names around.

Exactly what is the "false presumption" I am supposed to have made?

BTW, I think it's pretty funny that Morein would call George a
mosquito behind his back. You can always tell the slimy backstabbers...
they always want to know what everyone thinks because they lack a spine
to follow their own moral compass.

ScottW

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Seeking contributors to scientific inquiry	Dirk Bruere at Neopax	Pro Audio	0	February 4th 06 06:35 PM
Controling playback speed (novice inquiry)	[email protected]	Pro Audio	1	December 17th 05 04:05 PM
Controling playback speed (novice inquiry)	[email protected]	Pro Audio	0	December 17th 05 04:00 PM
Mix and mastering inquiry	Raymond	Pro Audio	1	August 6th 04 08:31 AM
PBS Sound Stage Inquiry	Martin	Pro Audio	0	July 20th 03 06:02 AM

Menu

About Us