"JustMe" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here - banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.



Agreed.

(Feck me, the 'Pouncing Ps' really *do* think they own this group, don't
they? :-)


Ya hafta fekkin' larf......

:-)

In article , Eiron wrote:
John Phillips wrote:

Only last year I replaced a 1984-ish vintage Philips CD303 CD player as
part of a complete upgrade (and that CD player was the youngest element
of the system). My emphasis (not to be taken to exclude others' views)
has long been on enjoying the music rather than looking for the latest
upgrade.

Did you do a DBT between 1984 and 2003 CD players to see just how far
technology has advanced?

Err, no. You may be surprised (or maybe not) that doing the comparison
didn't even occur to me until you just mentioned it. Even now I don't
think I want to do so (sorry).

I made the selection of the complete new system on the basis of my
non-blind impression of much better sound. However I suspect that's
mostly down to the loudspeakers (2003 kit versus 1978, but again I
am not sure I want to expend the effort to check that with a test).

Having bought the kit I'm back to just listening to the music again.
No fettling of amplifiers, no comparison of cables or other components.
Just the purchase and enjoyment of music (and my continuing, theoretical
rather than practical, interest in the technology).

--
John Phillips

In article , JustMe
wrote:

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

Or it might be if you'd written: "The best possible audio reproduction *for
me* is whatever *I* prefer." :-)

Thus allowing the rest of us to have different preferences to your own.
;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:07:55 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

(Bit like their own preferred choice of kit, if you stop to think about it -
'sand amps'..... ;-)

Ahh, would that be the ones with big glass bottles made from sand?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:19:39 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here - banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

End of reason, certainly. So, you're another dumphukke who is only
interested in what he thinks he likes, and doesn't want to learn about
possibly better alternatives. Phine, do pheel phree to phukke oph.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:39:29 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

"JustMe" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here - banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

Agreed.

Well of course you agree, you're as braindead as he is!

(Feck me, the 'Pouncing Ps' really *do* think they own this group, don't
they? :-)

We're just rebutting the grotty G's who seem to believe that they
really do have a fiefdom here.

If you have a substantive argument, feel free to present it.
Otherwise, fekk off.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In message , Keith G
writes
Ya hafta fekkin' larf......

The rest of us have been laughing (or larfing as you say in your estuary
English) at you for a long time now.

--
Chris Morriss

Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here -
banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from
it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

Agreed.

Well of course you agree, you're as braindead as he is!

Curious. I have not found the need to stoop low and mindlessly slag you off.
I think it's time for me to declare the moral high ground as mine.

(Feck me, the 'Pouncing Ps' really *do* think they own this group, don't
they? :-)

We're just rebutting the grotty G's who seem to believe that they
really do have a fiefdom here.

If you have a substantive argument, feel free to present it.
Otherwise, fekk off.

It's hard to argue with that kind of "wisdom". Clearly you've lost the will
to debate this rationally.

Keith G wrote:
Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here - banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from
it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

End of reason, certainly. So, you're another dumphukke who is only
interested in what he thinks he likes, and doesn't want to learn about
possibly better alternatives. Phine, do pheel phree to phukke oph.

On the contrary, I am open to ideas and am happy to listen and compare - as
made clear in the "Every amp in one" and "Amp swap disappointment" threads.
However if, having compared "A" with "B" I conclude that "A" is preferable,
then you cannot tell me otherwise and appear rational yourself.

You seem to be one of those people who knows what's right for everyone else
and descends into telling others to "phukke oph" when they refuse to agree.
Is that reasoned debate?

"JustMe" wrote in message
...
Oh good, because I'm becoming a wee bit concerned that, despite a
perfectly good rec.audio.tech newsgroup, this group is being
pounded
into the ground by a few 'techie types' who (it seems to me) are
bleaching out all the interest and general involvement here -
banging
on about dubious 'technical truisms' which may (or may not) have
any
bearing on a particular individual's appreciation of the sound he
perceives from his own audio gear and the enjoyment he gets from
it....

Then you'd stop posting about your crappy valves and vinyl, and start
discussing the best possible audio reproduction...

The best possible audio reproduction is whatever *I* prefer.

End of.

Agreed.

Well of course you agree, you're as braindead as he is!

Curious. I have not found the need to stoop low and mindlessly slag you
off.
I think it's time for me to declare the moral high ground as mine.

(Feck me, the 'Pouncing Ps' really *do* think they own this group, don't
they? :-)

We're just rebutting the grotty G's who seem to believe that they
really do have a fiefdom here.

If you have a substantive argument, feel free to present it.
Otherwise, fekk off.

It's hard to argue with that kind of "wisdom". Clearly you've lost the
will
to debate this rationally.


Oi, JustMe, you're another one! - Could you leave the headers on those to
whom you are replying?

(Although I recognise my own words above and there's absolutely *no* prizes
for recognising the moronic outpourings of the group's very own No. 1
gob****e, as he attempts to censor/control subscription to this group!! ;-)