"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message


Read it again (as you would say) and see the words
'cartridge engineer' - people were listening to records
long before cartridges were invented.

Keith, do you even know what people listened to before
cartrdges were invented?

Keith, do you think that cartrdiges were a step forward
or a step back? Keith, do you seriously think that Edison and the team
that invented the first practical phonograph were *not*
technical people (e.g. engineers, scientists,
mathematicians, and skilled craftsmen?) Trust me, they weren't people
like the anti-technology
audiophiles and high end audio charlatans of today.


WTF was all that rubbish, Arnie?

either over your head Keith, or not questions that you want to answer.

"David Looser" wrote

snip crap unread

What really seems to be the case, is it that you are so obsessed with
"winning" every argument on this ng that you will write any old rubbish
(whilst being as obnixiously patronising as they come) in the hope that
the other party will simply give up in disgust (as Don has done) rather
than admit you are talking ********.


Don doesn't give up in disgust - he gets into arguments he can't win and
eventually craps out.

Now, what '********' are you referring to...??

I think this is the original post by Don that's got you all lathered up:

"I think there is some onus on the user to pick a suitable
tonearm/cartridge
combination for his own purposes or stick with manufacturer's
recommendations in the case of 'consumer' gear. It is important to keep a
perspective - over the last half century or so a lot of people have had a
lot of pleasure listening to records without getting their panties in a
bunch* over the Modulus Of Anything!!

Ah, but all that has only been possible because some engineer did get
his panties in a bunch. If nobody had, it would all be crap."


Am I right?

I was making a simple point to Jim Lesurf and Don saw it as an opportunity
to make one of his usual smart remarks about a singular aspect of the
conversation I was having with Jim and push his ****ing stupid *unrelenting*
'engineer' agenda. Since then I have been swinging on his dick with a
specific 'point of order' - namely that people were listening to records
long before cartridges were produced.

They were.

It's a fact.

You can't argue with it!

(It actually morphs into 'engineers' develop and improve that which
'ordinary mortals' instigate, but let's not get into the *engineer* **** all
over again...)

So why don't you just keep quiet?

Or do you like me swinging on *your* dick?

:-)

Now to sort Arny out - which is a hoot because right now I'm taking an
'interstitial' break from disk 5 of Band Of Brothers!!

(BluRay, of course! :-)

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message


Read it again (as you would say) and see the words
'cartridge engineer' - people were listening to records
long before cartridges were invented.

Keith, do you even know what people listened to before
cartrdges were invented?

Keith, do you think that cartrdiges were a step forward
or a step back? Keith, do you seriously think that Edison and the team
that invented the first practical phonograph were *not*
technical people (e.g. engineers, scientists,
mathematicians, and skilled craftsmen?) Trust me, they weren't people
like the anti-technology
audiophiles and high end audio charlatans of today.


WTF was all that rubbish, Arnie?

either over your head Keith, or not questions that you want to answer.


No, I'm more a Tesla and Berliner man, so I'll pass if you don't mind....

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


(It actually morphs into 'engineers' develop and improve that which
'ordinary mortals' instigate,
And you beleive that? Streuth, you're a bigger idiot than I realised!

So why don't you just keep quiet?

You really think you own this newsgroup don't you? Well I've got news for
you - you don't.

Or do you like me swinging on *your* dick?

I've no idea what that is supposed to mean. But it shows that as well as
being a pedantic, patronising git you are also crude and offensive.

Now get lost.

David.

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"David Looser" wrote

snip crap unread

What really seems to be the case, is it that you are so obsessed with
"winning" every argument on this ng that you will write any old
rubbish (whilst being as obnixiously patronising as they come) in the
hope that the other party will simply give up in disgust (as Don has
done) rather than admit you are talking ********.


Don doesn't give up in disgust - he gets into arguments he can't win and
eventually craps out.

I certainly often give up on trying to explain something to you. I suspect
others also do so.

[snip]

It's a fact.

Your opinions which you regard as 'fact'.

You can't argue with it!

No point when it passes you by. :-)

Or do you like me swinging on *your* dick?

:-)

You behaviour is childishly boring and off-putting. The above is a
nice example of how you regard threads like this as an 'argument'
to 'win' when the people who have tried to have a conversation
with you may have no such view in mind. You have re-reminded me
why I've often decided not to bother trying to exchange any ideas
or info with you as it does tend to become a waste of effort. When we get
out of your personal comfort zone you resort to a mix of being patronising
and using language like the above, in the process dismissing or evading
what others say with no sign of having understood it.

So I have certainly often decided to give up on you. And when I try again,
end up wishing I hadn't bothered.

No doubt you will once again respond in a way that either shows you are
patronising, or that you are baffled by the reactions to your behaviour.
Afraid this has come up before, and you have never understood so far as I
can tell.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message
...


(It actually morphs into 'engineers' develop and improve that which
'ordinary mortals' instigate,
And you beleive that? Streuth, you're a bigger idiot than I realised!

So why don't you just keep quiet?

You really think you own this newsgroup don't you? Well I've got news for
you - you don't.


Whaaat? - I don't??

Bummer!

Who does then - you??

Or is it Pucci and you're just policing the group for him while he's away?



Or do you like me swinging on *your* dick?

I've no idea what that is supposed to mean.


You are either a liar or even more gormless than I thought, then....


But it shows that as well as
being a pedantic, patronising git you are also crude and offensive.

Now get lost.


Er, you're the one jumping onto my posts, clown....



David.


Yeah, right! - Well, I can think of 3 *far* more interesting 'Davids' who
used to contribute regularly here before they got fed up with being
continually 'put right' by the techno****s and wannabee 'engineers'!

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:


Don doesn't give up in disgust - he gets into arguments he can't win and
eventually craps out.

I certainly often give up on trying to explain something to you.


Yes, you usually catch on eventually....


I suspect
others also do so.


I should care about that or summat? (What others are there - we're down to
less than half a dozen now, ain't we?)



You behaviour is childishly boring and off-putting.


So is yours, but I don't go on about it....


The above is a
nice example of how you regard threads like this as an 'argument'
to 'win' when the people who have tried to have a conversation
with you may have no such view in mind.


Bull****. I am being pounded by people who don't want to see me "win" -
includes you now...

("win"? win what?)


You have re-reminded me
why I've often decided not to bother trying to exchange any ideas
or info with you as it does tend to become a waste of effort.


How many times do I get to hear that?


When we get
out of your personal comfort zone you resort to a mix of being patronising
and using language like the above,


Oh, my mistake - *you* own the group then?

(Does Pucci know? :-)



in the process dismissing or evading
what others say with no sign of having understood it.


I understand what I want to understand, what you don't understand is that I
don't bother even trying to understand what I don't want to understand.
Savvy?




So I have certainly often decided to give up on you. And when I try again,
end up wishing I hadn't bothered.


How many times do I get to hear that?



No doubt you will once again respond in a way that either shows you are
patronising,


I think you're confusing me with Arny Kruger....


or that you are baffled by the reactions to your behaviour.
Afraid this has come up before, and you have never understood so far as I
can tell.


No, not baffled any more - I understand fine that you don't like to be
included in the blanket descriptive 'techno****s....

(Am I not right? :-)

Now, the SHORT ANSWER:

If you don't like what I post, why TF do you (and the others) keep
reading/replying to them? There's no bonfire without idiots like you keep
throwing logs on....

;-)

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:


Don doesn't give up in disgust - he gets into arguments he can't win
and eventually craps out.

I certainly often give up on trying to explain something to you.


Yes, you usually catch on eventually....

Thanks for demonstrating that you did as I expected and responded in a
patronising and childish manner. Cleared up any doubts I had.


The above is a
nice example of how you regard threads like this as an 'argument' to
'win' when the people who have tried to have a conversation with you
may have no such view in mind.


Bull****. I am being pounded by people who don't want to see me "win" -
includes you now...

Afraid you are still stuck in your self-delusion that what you write makes
you 'win' something when others don't comment or you can repond in a
patronising or abusive manner. Now with your added delusion that others
"don't want to see you win".

If you don't like what I post, why TF do you (and the others) keep
reading/replying to them?

In my case because I keep making the error of thinking it might be
possible to have a friendly conversation with you *without* you
descending into being patronising or turning conversation into
your delusion about how you 'win' and others don't want you to.
My mistake.

Also because when what you write contains errors then responding
may help others even if you don't like it and think it is my "not
wanting you to win". The group isn't your personal debating society,
solely provided as a forum in which you can 'win'.

But I agree with you to the extent that, yes, it is wasted so far
as you are concerned. But you don't have to respond to me, either.


30

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:38:35 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

I understand what I want to understand, what you don't understand is that I
don't bother even trying to understand what I don't want to understand.
Savvy?

And that says it all, I'm afraid. Even that wouldn't be a problem if
you weren't so damned evangelical about your ignorance. There is
nothing quite so ugly as inverted snobbery.

d

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:38:35 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

I understand what I want to understand, what you don't understand is that
I
don't bother even trying to understand what I don't want to understand.
Savvy?

And that says it all, I'm afraid. Even that wouldn't be a problem if
you weren't so damned evangelical about your ignorance. There is
nothing quite so ugly as inverted snobbery.


I dunno Don, you're in, you're out - which is it?

And your remarks - do see me being able to make comments like them without
gathering another turgid 'your opinions are not facts, I'm afraid' from
JLS...??

The selective hypocrisy in this group has to be seen to be believed!

For the benefit of the rest of the **** Pack who will be hanging on every
word, let's put you right about 'evangelical ignorance' once and for all
time, shall we? (Don't want it to be a *problem* for you!)

Contrary to the various snide remarks from various quarters over the years,
I have had a good deal of interest in 'audio' (up to a point) and have my
own preferences in 'audio matters' - liking/preferring valves and vinyl, as
you well know. Despite *zero* knowledge and experience of electronics (none
of this is or was ever my 'comfort zone'), this interest led me to train
myself to solder and identify simple electronic components by building 4
Vellemans kits - all of which worked perfectly right from the off! See 3 of
them he

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/Vellemans.jpg)

(The 4th is a metronome which Swim's got somewhere!)

I then bought and built a World Audio Designs KT88 valve amp kit and that
also worked from the off, after I had sorted out a bit of hum (short in the
speaker connections). I then built 6 pairs of speakers, a 2A3 SET amplifier,
a 3 box valve phono stage and fettled/replinthed numerous turntables. (Pix
of all this stuff have featured here often over the last few years.)

You may be interested to know that, by this time, I had picked up an email
contact in Brussels who was very interested in what I had been doing and
wanted to do it himself. (Didn't know a thing - only a 'clueless' Senior
Research Engineer at The Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics doing
research work for NATO... ;-) So I taught him to solder over the ether (not
too shabby, I would have thought?) and he went at it like a dog onto chopped
liver - Velleman kits to start with; finishing on Audio Note stuff!

We have been friends for years now (although gone quiet lately), he calls me
'Maestro' or 'K the K' and I have 1,169 of his pix on my hard drive - what
do you want to see?

Now, does any of that get anything like a 'Well done, you thick old ****!'
from the assmbly here...??

No, does it ********....

All I have had in this ****ty little ng is serious idiots like Lesurf and
Kruger getting the arse because I won't quietly suck up *endless* digital
**** that doesn't interest me (like Nyquist Theorem) and others (does this
include you now?) who merely want to do a bit of showing off with
indescribably repetetive and boring techno 'willy-waving', trying to make
themselves look clever and who don't like it if I won't stay still so they
can pat (or batter) me on the head!

(They talk to me like I'm a surly teenager who won't listen rather than an
'old dog' of 62 years who frequently can't remember what TF it was I was
going to look up, by the time I've managed to get to the computer and open a
'new tab'!!)

Engineering? Asitappens, I love it, but at the 'Big, Bigger, Biggest' or
'Building The Ultimate' level (more mechanical and construction than
electronics) and I don't have the brain cells left active to chase down
detail I really don't want or need to know.

See this crop from a screen capture of my TV recordings that I posted here
some days ag:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...rdingsList.jpg

Note the programme types: Art, History, Music and Engineering.

As I said recently, I am surrounded by real engineers - what I don't like is
wannabee creeps hanging about in this dark little corner try to act 'big
fish in little pond' smart...

(OK, make that 'puddle' now... :-)

'Nuff now - said more than I really wanted to already. It's up to you Don -
make your mind up if it's really me that's the arsehole in this group. (Too
late for Tedious Jim - he's already run off at the mouth and shot himself in
the foot, AFAIAC....)

Anyway, I can go either way and just remember: I only pay back in the coin
I'm paid!

(That ain't too hard a concept to grasp, is it?)

EOT