![]() |
Frequency response of the ear
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote: If you Google dummy head recording without the quotation marks you get more than 100,000 hits. 'about' 116,000 here I'm sure everyone will be fascinated by this. 1,760 with the quote marks. Probably the number is changing because of the natter in here. Graham |
Frequency response of the ear
Phil Allison wrote: "Arny Krueger" Do some homework, first. Google gives 100,000 hits for "dummy head recording". ** Nope - its only 1750 hits for the phrase. Try it now you blind bat ! Graham |
Frequency response of the ear
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Phil Anus Hole" wrote That'll be my other half - she's probably got it set for *no titties* or somesuch..... (I learned a long time ago to take Arnie's claims with a shovelful of salt - he's like a lot of people who try to *speak with authority* when most of the time they've no idea..!!! ;-) Joke, as the truth is quite definately otherwise. ** Arny is a compewter geek by nature and inclination. Phil is just upset that I invented ABX tests of of audio equipment, while he could do no better than write an article praising it. Like any computer, he can only manipulate the data - but not illuminate it. The evidence is he can't even do that accurately.... Particularly when people entertain themselves by misinterpreting what was written. By this time someone has figured out that the quotes were there to delimit the search text from the rest of the text, not to define the actual search string. |
Frequency response of the ear
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Keith G" wrote in message "Phil Anus Hole" wrote That'll be my other half - she's probably got it set for *no titties* or somesuch..... (I learned a long time ago to take Arnie's claims with a shovelful of salt - he's like a lot of people who try to *speak with authority* when most of the time they've no idea..!!! ;-) Joke, as the truth is quite definately otherwise. Might want to check your spelling there (no typo - keys too far apart).... Particularly when people entertain themselves by misinterpreting what was written. By this time someone has figured out that the quotes were there to delimit the search text from the rest of the text, not to define the actual search string. It's your own fault, you should have made your point more clearly with the phrase 'sans quotes' or somesuch - or maybe just have tidied your search up in the first place? |
Frequency response of the ear
"Arny Krueger" "Phil Allison" ** Arny is a compewter geek by nature and inclination. Like any computer, he can only manipulate the data - but not illuminate it. Phil is just upset that I invented ABX tests of of audio equipment, while he could do no better than write an article praising it. ** Well, goodness me - Arny has just provided us all with a perfect example of exactly what I just complained about him. I did NOT write that article on the ESP site in order to praise ABX testing, but rather to BURY it !! --------------------------- Here is the link, please read it and if at all possible carry out the simple test it describes. http://sound.westhost.com/absw.htm Once set up, the test result is immediately apparent, definitive and convincing to all but the congenitally mentally retarded - naturally, the latter group includes all you audiophools. This is of course entirely unlike the long, tedious, complicated & ultimately unconvincing statistical method used by the literal thinking Arny. ...... Phil |
Frequency response of the ear
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:24:00 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote: ** Well, goodness me - Arny has just provided us all with a perfect example of exactly what I just complained about him. I did NOT write that article on the ESP site in order to praise ABX testing, but rather to BURY it !! But what you SAID was: "Many of you will know about the ABX system for doing audio comparisons. No doubt it is a very fine piece of design but out of reach for the average person. Some years ago I felt that a much simpler device would at least allow me to do comparisons on power amplifiers while the music played in a similar way to ABX." You praise ABX but find it too expensive to set up. Your use of "at least" states that you see your method as a cut-price alternative which is however adequate for some purposes. Though I really don't know why I bother when you children start bickering :-) |
Frequency response of the ear
"Laurence Payne" "Phil Allison" ** Well, goodness me - Arny has just provided us all with a perfect example of exactly what I just complained about him. I did NOT write that article on the ESP site in order to praise ABX testing,but rather to BURY it !! But what you SAID was: "Many of you will know about the ABX system for doing audio comparisons. No doubt it is a very fine piece of design but out of reach for the average person. Some years ago I felt that a much simpler device would at least allow me to do comparisons on power amplifiers while the music played in a similar way to ABX." You praise ABX but find it too expensive to set up. ** Nothing like what I said at all !! Most folk have heard of ABX, so I mentioned it as a reference WITHOUT commenting on how or how well it works. Your use of "at least" states that you see your method as a cut-price alternative ** Nothing like what I said. The " at least " refers to power amplifiers being the most suitable subject for my test - and they were the only things I ( and most folk ) wanted to compare. The lower cost is simply due to the elegance of the concept, which is that of an instant, seamless changeover at the whim of the listener. This is of course ENTIRELY unlike the long, tedious, complicated & ultimately unconvincing statistical method used by the literal thinking Arny with his original ABX contraption. So it buries it. ....... Phil |
Frequency response of the ear
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:10:02 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote: But what you SAID was: "Many of you will know about the ABX system for doing audio comparisons. No doubt it is a very fine piece of design but out of reach for the average person. Some years ago I felt that a much simpler device would at least allow me to do comparisons on power amplifiers while the music played in a similar way to ABX." You praise ABX but find it too expensive to set up. ** Nothing like what I said at all !! Most folk have heard of ABX, so I mentioned it as a reference WITHOUT commenting on how or how well it works. Some people might not understand that calling it a "fine piece of design" meant you didn't like it :-) In fact, if you cut the veiled (and not-veiled) sarcasm and other flowery language out of the whole article, it would be a great improvement. The sad thing is, you're probably right. But you come across as a sad amateur with an obsession. |
Frequency response of the ear
"Laurence Payne in the Arse Fool " But what you SAID was: "Many of you will know about the ABX system for doing audio comparisons. No doubt it is a very fine piece of design but out of reach for the average person. Some years ago I felt that a much simpler device would at least allow me to do comparisons on power amplifiers while the music played in a similar way to ABX." You praise ABX but find it too expensive to set up. ** Nothing like what I said at all !! Most folk have heard of ABX, so I mentioned it as a reference WITHOUT commenting on how or how well it works. Some people might not understand that calling it a "fine piece of design" meant you didn't like it :-) ** The ABX switching box is a device ( ie a piece of design) - and since I have never seen one I expressed no personal opinion about it. However, I made NO mention WHATEVER of the ABX testing procedure - so it is utterly ** FALSE and ABSURD ** to claim that I praised it. Comes as no surprise to me that smug, congenital ****heads like Payne and Arny saw no problem in doing exactly that. In fact, if you cut the veiled (and not-veiled) sarcasm and other flowery language out of the whole article, ** I used no " flowery " language at all. The veiled sarcasm ( contained in several warnings ) is well justified, in light of actual experience using the A-B switching box device with other people. Here is the article again: http://sound.westhost.com/absw.htm The last thing most folk want ( especially rabid audiophools) is to have their long held beliefs & golden ear pronouncements proved * completely wrong * - and so be made to look a damn fool by anyone or anything. So, I gave fair warning to all and hoped that would goad the bravest souls who read the item into action. Cos it is a 100% certainty that no posturing, gutless audiophool scumbags ever would. ...... Phil |
Frequency response of the ear
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:58:33 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote: Most folk have heard of ABX, so I mentioned it as a reference WITHOUT commenting on how or how well it works. Some people might not understand that calling it a "fine piece of design" meant you didn't like it :-) ** The ABX switching box is a device ( ie a piece of design) - and since I have never seen one I expressed no personal opinion about it. However, I made NO mention WHATEVER of the ABX testing procedure - so it is utterly ** FALSE and ABSURD ** to claim that I praised it. Comes as no surprise to me that smug, congenital ****heads like Payne and Arny saw no problem in doing exactly that. Why don't you write half a page of unemotional reasoned argument on why you think the ABX method is flawed and/or unnecessarily complicated? Then we just might be inclined to take you seriously. Or you could serve up some more personal abuse. Would that be more fun? :-) |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk