Useless Wiecky wrote:
Mr. McCoy

Write what you will, but you are still both

Okay, that's two.

evasive, tiresome and quite
stupid

No, no, no, Useless. "Evasive", "tiresome" and "stupid" are three
items. Three is not a 'both' number.

as to actually answering a direct question.

We'll return to this vexed "direct question".

One might be
convinced that you are actually and entirely smoke and mirrors as
opposed to the wise and all-knowing oracle such as is your posture.

Or both, or neither, of course. You don't have either the brains or the
command of the language to discover which, and right after I let you
think one or the other I might change my mind just because it is lovely
little you. Well, you might be lovely after you take tip about your
mouthwash.

Put
some facts on the screen so your wisdom becomes obvious to all, if you
are able.

Is this your idea of a "direct question", Useless? A non-specific
demand for knowledge, delivered with menaces?

Or is it just another excuse to make yourself look important by abusing
your betters, eh, Useless?

Typical.

Peter Wieck

Useless.

Wyncote, PA

Home of the Useless.

Unsigned out of contempt

Three sets of threats from Useless Wiecky trying to extort information:

wrote:
Mr. McCoy:

For the record, please write for yourself, and use terms such as "me"
and "my" when rendering an opinion, not "we"... unless you are claiming
Royalty and the "we" that goes with it. If you are making such claims,
then fine, I can live with the "we". Otherwise, it is simply arrogant
and reduces your already tenuous credibility.

Now, I have read what you have written, and the question remains: Is it
the purpose of SET-based systems to reproduce what goes into them, or
not? It remains a simple question however much smoke and mirrors are
used in obfuscation or avoidance of the answer. And, as I am trying to
be civil here, not that you have engaged in (much) obfuscation above.

So, in light of your absolute statement:

A SET amp is not a performer, it is a reproducer.

What does a SET amp add/take away from the signal applied to it other
than straight-wire amplification? A level of accuracy in the answer
would be desirable, I believe I can comprehend imprecise terms if
accuracy is achieved. But, as a massive hint, your range-of-answers
a

A. NO. A SET amp output is indistinguishable from the input excepting
volume.
B. YES. A SET amp adds certain artifacts or corrects for certain lacks
in the original input, and they a (well-defined terms follow).
C. IT DEPENDS. Well defined terms on what the dependencies are follow.

We are not discussing speakers here, but if speakers are an issue, then
please clearly define how-so and why. Are _THEY_ the actual performers
in this situation? The AMP is merely an 'enabler'?

I agree on the originality piece. Only the first performance is
"original", all-that-follow are colored by feedback from that first
one... even if only in annotations to the score. Perhaps the greatest
appeal of music, classical and otherwise, is its infinite capacity for
interpretation, some great some awful, but the capacity remains.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

Another bullying harangue from Useless Wiecky:

wrote:
Mr. McCoy:

You may believe that "Precision is the first scientific virtue", God
knows you repeat it often enough (See: The Bellman's Proof). But
consider the analogy of the Two Thermometers in the Woods.

Little Thermometer A was a wonderful instrument. She could read to four
decimal places, Farenheit, Celcius, Kelvin and any scale imposed upon
her. She could show digits in Old and New Arabic numerals, Roman
Numerals, whatever was asked of her. She prided herself in her
precision. She lit up in the dark, and was polarized against sun glare.
Altogether a glamorous lady.

Little Thermometer B was a much less distinguished a lad. He could only
read in full degrees, and had only two scales printed on him, and could
not show digits at all, just a line against the printed scales. He
neither lit up, nor was shielded against glare. He had no language
other than Old Arabic, of course.

However, when called upon to actually perform as thermometers, it was
rapidly discovered that Ms. A was off the true temperature anywhere
from +9 to -6 degrees on any scale, and unpredictably so at that. And
the until-now disrespected little Mr. B was always dead-on true
temperature. All this only after some serious damage resulted from too
much trust in Ms. A... fooled by her glamorous precision.

So, precision without accuracy... your particular claim to fame and
observed general behavior... can be dangerously worse than useless.
Accuracy, even if not terribly precise is of far more value and, dare I
say it UTILITY.

You should be very careful of the words you use. For all those that you
fling about in your psuedo-literate frenzies, you do seem to have at
very best a dim sense of their meanings. Much as poor Ms A. above.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

And a bunch of lies from Useless, plus more blustering harangue:

wrote:

Nope. I "abused" Mr. McCoy for a complete lack of precision and an
abuse of the term. And I am not at all demanding precision, I am
searching for accuracy... So, demonstrate your ability and
understanding of the terms if you are able. Please. You are the one
given to absolute statements, yet have a peculiar habit of avoiding
defining what you mean by them.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA