"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Iain Churches" wrote

Thinking back, there have been very few people
indeed on this group who were "active in audio",
by that I mean actuallty building things,amps and
speakers, and making evaluations and comparisons.


ISTM that there are quite a lot of people here who build things.
In recent months the group has had requests for help with all sorts of
problems that various posters have had with construction projects. Maybe
these aren't all "amps & speakers", but there is a lot more to audio than
those two particular items. Recently we've even had someone building a
valve-based audio mixer, does that not count as being "active in audio" in
your book?

As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that in a meaningful way
is not something that is really within the province of the amateur
enthusiast. But of course we have Jim Lesurf here, who far and away the most
active and expert in this respect of those currently on URA.

Andy was one, and Keith another. Both got very
rough and treatment.

In the time I've been here Keith has dished out far more "rough treatment"
to others than he has received himself.


IIRC most of the shouting down was done by the
remarkably short-lived Pinkie/Arny double act,
Vinyl Grinder and Monkey, as they were known.


I've been here quite a while, but maybe not long enough to remember that
one. In recent weeks, though, we've had the Keith/Bill double act who have
egged each other on to come up with newer and ever more offensive nicknames
for those they choose to regard as being their "enemies". In the short time
he's been here Bill has become one of URA's most prolific posters, yet the
vast majority of his posts have been either gratuitous insults, or pointless
"me too" comments. I'm surprised that, whilst you are so keen to complain
about the "shouting down" that happened in the distant past you have been
silent about Bill's current highly negative influence on URA. What hold does
he have over you? Or are worried that if you comment on his crass behaviour
he'll add you to his list of people to insult?

David.

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"Iain Churches" wrote


As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that in a meaningful
way is not something that is really within the province of the amateur
enthusiast.

I'd slightly disagree with that. It is quite possible for amateurs to do
meaningful evaluations and comparisons. The snag is that for them to be
meaningful there are various details of how this should be done that they
need to understand and deal with. That in turn means they should be willing
to learn about the various factors that can impede making meaningful
evaluations, and understand the methods which help to deal with these
factors.

There are many factors which are well known to professional audio engineers
that can lead to erronious conclusions. Equally, a number of experimental
and proceedural methods have been developed that deal with them. None of
them require the physical skills of a brain surgeon, or the understanding
of theories as complex as quantum gravity. They just need the person to
have enough interest and open-minded willingness to study the topic.

Alas, many enthusiasts (some of them 'professionals' in the sense that they
do it for cash) fail to do this. And thus produce results which lead them
to drawing conclusions which their actual 'evaluation' results don't really
support.

That in turn leads to some adopting various conclusions as matters of
faith, and to deny the possibility that their evaluations could possibly be
flawed. This is a shame as it can tend to mislead others and hamper genuine
improvements and discoveries.

Andy was one, and Keith another. Both got very rough and treatment.

In the time I've been here Keith has dished out far more "rough
treatment" to others than he has received himself.

I'm not sure what "rough treatment" of Andy it is that Iain has in mind.
The only time I can recall having a serious disagreement with Andy is IIRC
some years ago when he said he failed to do things like check carefully for
possible problems like HF instability with a scope. Since this is
potentially a *safety* issue I was very concerned by that. I would
certainly not wish to make power amplifiers for anyone else without
checking such things.


IIRC most of the shouting down was done by the remarkably short-lived
Pinkie/Arny double act, Vinyl Grinder and Monkey, as they were known.

TBH Things these days seem quite mild compared to the years when Stewart
and Arny used to argue with 'Trotsky'. Hands up those of you who remember
that! 8-]



I've been here quite a while, but maybe not long enough to remember that
one. In recent weeks, though, we've had the Keith/Bill double act who
have egged each other on to come up with newer and ever more offensive
nicknames for those they choose to regard as being their "enemies". In
the short time he's been here Bill has become one of URA's most prolific
posters, yet the vast majority of his posts have been either gratuitous
insults, or pointless "me too" comments.

Yes, I've noticed that he seems to have picked up Keith's habit. Making
assertions that indicate he has no interest in what those like Arny, Dave,
etc, have to say whilst making content-free comments on many of their
postings. Why they can't do what others do, and simply ignore posts that
don't interest them, I don't know. Although Keith has in the past made
clear that his interest is in being able to "win" arguments. That is why I
eventually decided to give up trying to have a conversation with him about
audio. You can't really have a conversation with someone who treats what
you say as if it were all an argument to "win" by whatever means -
including patronising name calling, sniping at your other postings, etc.

Personally, I'm quite happy to read Keith's postings on things like his
interest in microphones, amps, etc. But I just skip over his yapping at
Arny, Dave, etc, as examples of his eagerness to "win" and "have the last
word".... as I expect he will probably now do here.... :-)

And, no, I can't say I am happy with the tone of some of Arny's comments,
either. But I just skip over that as I do what Keith (and now Bill) post of
similar ilk.

However I do think it a shame that all the name calling, etc, simply deters
others from contributing.

Personally, I'd prefer people to focus on audio, not on having playground
arguments. TBH I don't mind 'OT' postings if they are actually interesting.
Others I just skip over. That's Usenet. :-)

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

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message

"Iain Churches" wrote

Thinking back, there have been very few people
indeed on this group who were "active in audio",
by that I mean actually building things,amps and
speakers, and making evaluations and comparisons.


This is a pretty strange comment, particularly given its source, Iain.

AFAIK Iain himself has nearly zero actual hands-on involvement with audio. I
don't recall ever hearing about him personally soldering wires or parts,
cutting wood for enclosures or chassis, drilling and punching holes,
personally setting up mics or laying down mic cables, actually recording a
live performance by pressing the arm and record buttons, live mixing,
editing audio using a DAW, burning CDs for distribution to end users, etc.,
etc. Nada.

ISTM that there are quite a lot of people here who build
things.

Interesting that later on Iain demonizes me by name, and yet in terms of
hands-on audio work, I am probably among the top 20% around here. I have
both/video audio production and audio evaluation and construction projects
going on all of the time.

Note all of the childish insults that particularly Iain has heaped on what
little he knows about my production work - at this point perhaps 100s of
derisive posts, many of which have been given instant "me too" approval by
Kitty and Bill. They know full well that by shouting others down they can
make their own efforts seem more important.

In recent months the group has had requests for help with
all sorts of problems that various posters have had with
construction projects. Maybe these aren't all "amps &
speakers", but there is a lot more to audio than those
two particular items.

Agreed.

Recently we've even had someone
building a valve-based audio mixer, does that not count
as being "active in audio" in your book?

Point of order, wasn't that discussion mostly on RAT? Not that it isn't an
interesting and challenging project in a retro sort of way.

As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that
in a meaningful way is not something that is really
within the province of the amateur enthusiast. But of
course we have Jim Lesurf here, who far and away the most
active and expert in this respect of those currently on
URA.

This would be a joke. Speaking as the inventor of the ABX listening test
which has been probably *the* hottest topic in the history of audio when it
comes to "making evaluations and comparisons"... Then there is the audio
measurement work that was published on the web for about a decade as
www.pcavtech.com, a web site that in its day was very actively tracked and
mentioned on other influential web sites and magazines.

Andy was one, and Keith another. Both got very
rough and treatment.

Keith like Iain give far more rough treatment than they will ever get. I
give Keith points for actually getting his hands dirty with audio, and often
in positive ways. Unfortunately, he seems to need to take more personal
satisfaction from the group than he gives.

In the time I've been here Keith has dished out far more
"rough treatment" to others than he has received himself.

That's the problem with Keith. He's very active and entertaining with his
little experiments, but unfortunately he always wants to take credibility
away from others.

IIRC most of the shouting down was done by the
remarkably short-lived Pinkie/Arny double act,
Vinyl Grinder and Monkey, as they were known.

Iain and Keith both object strenuously when their claims are put to any
logical test. There is a reason - the facts don't back them up. Google
searching shows that "Vinyl Grinder" *never* showed up on UKRA until about
5 days ago.


I've been here quite a while, but maybe not long enough
to remember that one. In recent weeks, though, we've had
the Keith/Bill double act who have egged each other on to
come up with newer and ever more offensive nicknames for
those they choose to regard as being their "enemies". In
the short time he's been here Bill has become one of
URA's most prolific posters, yet the vast majority of his
posts have been either gratuitous insults, or pointless
"me too" comments.

Indeed.

I'm surprised that, whilst you are so
keen to complain about the "shouting down" that happened
in the distant past you have been silent about Bill's
current highly negative influence on URA. What hold does
he have over you? Or are worried that if you comment on
his crass behaviour he'll add you to his list of people
to insult?

I'm under the impression that Bill and Kitty are staunch defenders of Iain.
Fanciful posts like this suggest that Iain lives in a fantasy world, which
the three of them inhabit as one unhappy little family.

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

"Iain Churches" wrote

Thinking back, there have been very few people
indeed on this group who were "active in audio",
by that I mean actually building things,amps and
speakers, and making evaluations and comparisons.


This is a pretty strange comment, particularly given its source, Iain.

AFAIK Iain himself has nearly zero actual hands-on involvement with audio.
I don't recall ever hearing about him personally soldering wires or parts,
cutting wood for enclosures or chassis, drilling and punching holes,
personally setting up mics or laying down mic cables, actually recording
a live performance by pressing the arm and record buttons, live mixing,
editing audio using a DAW, burning CDs for distribution to end users,
etc., etc. Nada.

ISTM that there are quite a lot of people here who build
things.

Interesting that later on Iain demonizes me by name, and yet in terms of
hands-on audio work, I am probably among the top 20% around here. I have
both/video audio production and audio evaluation and construction projects
going on all of the time.

Note all of the childish insults that particularly Iain has heaped on what
little he knows about my production work - at this point perhaps 100s of
derisive posts, many of which have been given instant "me too" approval by
Kitty and Bill. They know full well that by shouting others down they can
make their own efforts seem more important.

In recent months the group has had requests for help with
all sorts of problems that various posters have had with
construction projects. Maybe these aren't all "amps &
speakers", but there is a lot more to audio than those
two particular items.

Agreed.

Recently we've even had someone
building a valve-based audio mixer, does that not count
as being "active in audio" in your book?

Point of order, wasn't that discussion mostly on RAT? Not that it isn't
an interesting and challenging project in a retro sort of way.

As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that
in a meaningful way is not something that is really
within the province of the amateur enthusiast. But of
course we have Jim Lesurf here, who far and away the most
active and expert in this respect of those currently on
URA.

This would be a joke. Speaking as the inventor of the ABX listening test
which has been probably *the* hottest topic in the history of audio when
it comes to "making evaluations and comparisons"... Then there is the
audio measurement work that was published on the web for about a decade as
www.pcavtech.com, a web site that in its day was very actively tracked and
mentioned on other influential web sites and magazines.

Andy was one, and Keith another. Both got very
rough and treatment.

Keith like Iain give far more rough treatment than they will ever get. I
give Keith points for actually getting his hands dirty with audio, and
often in positive ways. Unfortunately, he seems to need to take more
personal satisfaction from the group than he gives.

In the time I've been here Keith has dished out far more
"rough treatment" to others than he has received himself.

That's the problem with Keith. He's very active and entertaining with his
little experiments, but unfortunately he always wants to take credibility
away from others.

IIRC most of the shouting down was done by the
remarkably short-lived Pinkie/Arny double act,
Vinyl Grinder and Monkey, as they were known.

Iain and Keith both object strenuously when their claims are put to any
logical test. There is a reason - the facts don't back them up. Google
searching shows that "Vinyl Grinder" *never* showed up on UKRA until
about 5 days ago.


I've been here quite a while, but maybe not long enough
to remember that one. In recent weeks, though, we've had
the Keith/Bill double act who have egged each other on to
come up with newer and ever more offensive nicknames for
those they choose to regard as being their "enemies". In
the short time he's been here Bill has become one of
URA's most prolific posters, yet the vast majority of his
posts have been either gratuitous insults, or pointless
"me too" comments.

Indeed.

I'm surprised that, whilst you are so
keen to complain about the "shouting down" that happened
in the distant past you have been silent about Bill's
current highly negative influence on URA. What hold does
he have over you? Or are worried that if you comment on
his crass behaviour he'll add you to his list of people
to insult?

I'm under the impression that Bill and Kitty are staunch defenders of
Iain. Fanciful posts like this suggest that Iain lives in a fantasy world,
which the three of them inhabit as one unhappy little family.



Disregarding the unutterably pathetic *failed netbully/posse leader blubbing
his eyes out* content of this extraordinary post for a moment, just how does
one 'shout someone down' in a text based newsgroup...??

Did anybody post any *audio links* I didn't get to see?

LOL!

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Keith G" wrote

snip Anus' whining


Disregarding the unutterably pathetic *failed netbully/posse leader
blubbing his eyes out* content of this extraordinary post for a moment,
just how does one 'shout someone down' in a text based newsgroup...??

Did anybody post any *audio links* I didn't get to see?

LOL!




And WTF is 'URA'???

Looks like an abbreviation for an infection of some sort....

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

Keith G wrote:

And WTF is 'URA'???

It's a variety of nium.

Ian

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Ian Iveson" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

And WTF is 'URA'???

It's a variety of nium.

Ian



Wot's in a nium?

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that
in a meaningful way is not something that is really
within the province of the amateur enthusiast. But of
course we have Jim Lesurf here, who far and away the most
active and expert in this respect of those currently on
URA.

This would be a joke.

It's no joke. Jim has a real depth of understanding about audio, you don't.
It's that simple.

Speaking as the inventor of the ABX listening test which has been probably
*the* hottest topic in the history of audio when it comes to "making
evaluations and comparisons"..

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some gimmicky "test", it's
about having a real understanding what you are doing and closely controlling
the variables.

David.

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in message


As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that in a
meaningful way is not something that is really within the province of
the amateur enthusiast. But of course we have Jim Lesurf here, who
far and away the most active and expert in this respect of those
currently on URA.

This would be a joke.

It's no joke. Jim has a real depth of understanding about audio, you
don't. It's that simple.

FWIW I'd just as soon not have my name dragged into arguments of this kind.
I don't think they make a lot of sense. And TBH I do think that methods
like ABX can be very useful. So I would not wish to belittle or dismiss
Arny, or indeed many other people's work. There are many serious audio pros
who have done far more than I to establish ways to assess audio on a
reliable basis. Alas, most of the public don't know about them as they tend
to only appear at professional meetings and journals.

Speaking as the inventor of the ABX listening test which has been
probably *the* hottest topic in the history of audio when it comes to
"making evaluations and comparisons"..

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some gimmicky "test",
it's about having a real understanding what you are doing and closely
controlling the variables.

Arny can ( and no doubt will :-) ) speak up in his own defence. But again I
would dissociate myself from the idea that ABX is a "gimmicky test". AIUI
it is, indeed, based on understanding and trying to deal with some of the
basic factors I referred to above. i.e. it is a useful method for dealing
with some of the methodological flaws which can be committed in 'informal'
tests. If in doubt about this I'd suggest looking at the serious work by
many audio professionals into the topic of how to run evaluations in a
decently controlled and assessable manner.

Like all such methods, it does need to be applied with due care and
understanding by the users. But that isn't a flaw with ABX, or various
other methodological/experimental techniques.

So if you wish to argue with Arny or anyone else on a "my Dad's bigger than
your Dad" I'd prefer not to be chosen as a "Dad" on either end of the
inequality. :-)

If someone appreciates work I've done. I am pleased to have been thought
helpful. And I don't expect to please everyone. But I don't regard this as
a competition, let alone a beauty contest!

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

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , David Looser
wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in message


As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that in a
meaningful way is not something that is really within the province of
the amateur enthusiast. But of course we have Jim Lesurf here, who
far and away the most active and expert in this respect of those
currently on URA.

This would be a joke.

It's no joke. Jim has a real depth of understanding about audio, you
don't. It's that simple.

FWIW I'd just as soon not have my name dragged into arguments of this
kind.

OK Jim, point taken.

David.

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

As for "making evaluations and comparisons", doing that
in a meaningful way is not something that is really
within the province of the amateur enthusiast. But of
course we have Jim Lesurf here, who far and away the
most active and expert in this respect of those
currently on URA.

This would be a joke.

It's no joke. Jim has a real depth of understanding about
audio, you don't. It's that simple.

Well Dave, you get to be wrong. We both get audio pretty thoroughly, and at
such a level that you can't tell where we are above you.

Jim's more the academic, and I'm more of the practitioner.

As far as respect goes Dave, it is quite clear that you don't see the big
picture well enough to understand the place of both approaches. And it's
also clear Dave you've got a big grudge against me which clouds your vision
nearly to the point of blindness. Your blind hatred of me is why you made
the comparison. You want me to hurt.

I don't know why you're replying to me Dave. I thought you had me killfiled.
:-( Please do so again so you won't make such an idiot of yourself.

"Shouting Down" on URA
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and have put my name on
it. Tell it again to the AES who have incorporated some of my comments on
testing procedures into their standards.

it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your neck. Like Iain and
Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred and want me to hurt.

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and have put my name on
it. Tell it again to the AES who have incorporated some of my comments on
testing procedures into their standards.

it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your neck. Like Iain and
Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred and want me to hurt.



Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but, nevertheless, it is
almost certainly a fact that the great majority of people on this planet/in
this newsgroup probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether you continue to
breath or not, let alone bother to summon up enough energy to actually
*hate* you - what you are suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind personal remarks
and general ****-slinging to various people in this group over the years.

As any *religious bigot* would say: 'As you sew, so shall ye reap'....

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

On 16 Feb, 15:47, "Keith G" wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

...





"David Looser" wrote in


Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and have put my name on
it. Tell it again to the AES who have incorporated some of my comments on
testing procedures into their standards.

it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your neck. Like Iain and
Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred and want me to hurt.

Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but, nevertheless, it is
almost certainly a fact that the great majority of people on this planet/in
this newsgroup probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether you continue to
breath or not, let alone bother to summon up enough energy to actually
*hate* you - what you are suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind personal remarks
and general ****-slinging to various people in this group over the years.

As any *religious bigot* would say: 'As you sew, so shall ye reap'....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah yes, now I remember why I packed in posting to audio groups - the
same old suspects posting the same old stuff. Let's face it guys,
aside from speakers 'hi-fi' is done and dusted. All good modern amps
sound the same (when not actively processing the sound, as many modern
AV receivers seem to have more processing power then NASA!), all
sensibly made cables have *always* sounded the same, and media quality
is limited only by the idiocy of record producers, as we have widely
available 24/96 quality downloads which exceed the transparency and
resolution of microphones. If you want the truth, ask Jim! Slainte,
Stewart P.

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

In article
,
Audionut wrote:
On 16 Feb, 15:47, "Keith G" wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message



Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your neck. Like Iain
and Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred and want me to hurt.

Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but, nevertheless, it
is almost certainly a fact that the great majority of people on this
planet/in this newsgroup probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether
you continue to breath or not,


Ah yes, now I remember why I packed in posting to audio groups - the
same old suspects posting the same old stuff.

Yes, it does get quite boring when a few people keep making postings as
content free as "yawn" or repeating the same wordings just so they can
think they have 'scored a point' in some kind of playground argument.
However it is generally easy enough to ignore and killfile when the sources
are so predictable, and nothing is lost by skipping such vacuous postings.
:-)

Let's face it guys, aside from speakers 'hi-fi' is done and dusted.

I'd add 'room acoustics and setup' to that, at least. cf below.

All good modern amps sound the same (when not actively processing the
sound, as many modern AV receivers seem to have more processing power
then NASA!), all sensibly made cables have *always* sounded the same,
and media quality is limited only by the idiocy of record producers, as
we have widely available 24/96 quality downloads which exceed the
transparency and resolution of microphones.

My regret about this isn't so much the pointless arguments. It is the way
may displace more useful discussions by deterring people from even asking
questions. Also the unwillingness many display to accept the chance that
they might have something to learn which would to be to their advantage in
terms of being able to better enjoy music, etc.

If you want the truth, ask Jim!

I am tempted to take the duck-out Pilate suggested here. :-)

However the problem may be that some are certain they *know* the "truth"
without the need for any doubts, actual evidence, or engaging in discussion
- as distinct from finding an "argument" to "win".

Also, although a great deal may be known and understood by the professional
engineers involved, there is I think still some to be discovered and
learned by many writers and users - e.g. about ensuring combinations of
items work well together.

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

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

"Audionut" wrote


Ah yes, now I remember why I packed in posting to audio groups - the
same old suspects posting the same old stuff.


Yep.


Let's face it guys,
aside from speakers 'hi-fi' is done and dusted.


Certainly 'soldering iron hifi' is a retrospective exercise these days with
'audio' becoming the lesser part of *audiovisual* and, like everything else
now, it's all 'good' and hard to tell apart if you rip off the badges....

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

"Keith G" wrote


Certainly 'soldering iron hifi' is a retrospective exercise these days
with 'audio' becoming the lesser part of *audiovisual* and, like
everything else now, it's all 'good' and hard to tell apart if you rip off
the badges....


Actually, that's ******** - my stuff is anything up to '80 years old' and
ideally not much younger than '50 years old' for music!

'Cinema' is a different thing entirely....

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and
have put my name on it. Tell it again to the AES who
have incorporated some of my comments on testing
procedures into their standards.
it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the
variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your
neck. Like Iain and Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred
and want me to hurt.

Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

note that Kitty then proceeds to demonstrate his blind hatred and desire to
hurt with the following melt down:

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but,
nevertheless, it is almost certainly a fact that the
great majority of people on this planet/in this newsgroup
probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether you
continue to breath or not, let alone bother to summon up
enough energy to actually *hate* you - what you are
suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind
personal remarks and general ****-slinging to various
people in this group over the years.

Kitty, if you had any self-consciousness at all, you'd realize that the
above paragraph is excellent evidence illustrating exactly the point that I
made.

Amy blubs like a girlie....
 

"Audionut" wrote in message


Ah yes, now I remember why I packed in posting to audio
groups - the same old suspects posting the same old
stuff. Let's face it guys, aside from speakers 'hi-fi' is
done and dusted.

Try the Hydrogen Audio forums for a pleasant change.

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and
have put my name on it. Tell it again to the AES who
have incorporated some of my comments on testing
procedures into their standards.
it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the
variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your
neck. Like Iain and Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred
and want me to hurt.

Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

note that Kitty then proceeds to demonstrate his blind hatred and desire
to hurt with the following melt down:

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but,
nevertheless, it is almost certainly a fact that the
great majority of people on this planet/in this newsgroup
probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether you
continue to breath or not, let alone bother to summon up
enough energy to actually *hate* you - what you are
suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind
personal remarks and general ****-slinging to various
people in this group over the years.

Kitty, if you had any self-consciousness at all, you'd realize that the
above paragraph is excellent evidence illustrating exactly the point that
I made.


Not at all - read again:

what you are
suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind
personal remarks and general ****-slinging to various
people in this group over the years.


And it should all fall into place - no?

If it helps (I'm Old School Brit - we don't normally do 'soothing' and/or
'touchy/feely', so please excuse me if I'm not too good at it), I don't hate
you Amy, I think you're a **** - it's not quite the same thing. Ask anybody.

Now, forget all that ad hom and read/skim this surprisingly crumpled
brochure (for free, no fees will be paid) referring to one of the 'dodgy
mics' I've got on Fleabay atm:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GAP01.jpg

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GAP02.jpg


If I publish those links on the auction do you think it would:

A) Make people more inclined to buy the mic.

B) Make people more inclined to bugger off and buy a different mic on
another auction?

??

Remember, this is not an offer of a contract....

;-)

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message

Making evaluations and comparisons isn't about some
gimmicky "test",

Tell that to the AES, who firmly stand behind ABX and
have put my name on it. Tell it again to the AES who
have incorporated some of my comments on testing
procedures into their standards.
it's about having a real understanding
what you are doing and closely controlling the
variables.

Clearly Dave you are talking out of the back of your
neck. Like Iain and Kitty, you're driven by blind hatred
and want me to hurt.

Er, no - nothing of the sort, Amy....

note that Kitty then proceeds to demonstrate his blind hatred and desire
to hurt with the following melt down:

I know your ego won't allow you to consider this but,
nevertheless, it is almost certainly a fact that the
great majority of people on this planet/in this newsgroup
probably don't give a mosquito's fart whether you
continue to breath or not, let alone bother to summon up
enough energy to actually *hate* you - what you are
suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind
personal remarks and general ****-slinging to various
people in this group over the years.

Kitty, if you had any self-consciousness at all, you'd realize that the
above paragraph is excellent evidence illustrating exactly the point that
I made.


Not at all - read again:

what you are
suffering from here (and now) is the backlash of a
million and one of your smartarse/snide comments, unkind
personal remarks and general ****-slinging to various
people in this group over the years.


And it should all fall into place - no?

If it helps (I'm Old School Brit - we don't normally do 'soothing' and/or
'touchy/feely', so please excuse me if I'm not too good at it), I don't
hate you Amy, I think you're a **** - it's not quite the same thing. Ask
anybody.

Now, forget all that ad hom and read/skim this surprisingly crumpled
brochure (for free, no fees will be paid) referring to one of the 'dodgy
mics' I've got on Fleabay atm:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GAP01.jpg

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GAP02.jpg


If I publish those links on the auction do you think it would:

A) Make people more inclined to buy the mic.

B) Make people more inclined to bugger off and buy a different mic on
another auction?



Of course, if you have no clue Amy (as I suspect) it will be perfectly OK
for you not to say so here and just shuffle off and make more your usual
smartarse/snide comments elsewhere....

Iain would have been a better bet to ask - real (not imagined) experience
for starters and Golden Age being a Swedish company:

http://www.mamut.net/goldenagemusic/


In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely simultaneously peaky yet
dull' (or very similar) by someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a
Sound On Sound review...???

LOL!!

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely simultaneously peaky yet
dull' (or very similar) by someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly
in a Sound On Sound review...???

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know they are rarely
used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever is - the u87. One of the industry
standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

--
*Honk if you love peace and quiet.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound On
Sound review...???

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever is
- the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and out-and-out lying.

Here's what SOS *really* said:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may0...les/rodent.htm

"
I tested both these mics side by side and found that the sound in cardioid
mode was quite similar — there was a wonderful sense of high-end detail, but
without the sound becoming thin or harsh. In fact I'd say both models
produce what you'd expect from a well-designed transformerless FET mic, but
with rather lower background noise than most of the competition. The
somewhat constricted character that most cardioid mics exhibit to some
degree seems less noticeable in these new Rode designs, but when you switch
the NT2000 to its omni pattern, you quickly realise that omni-pattern mics
still sound more open and natural than cardioids. The same is true of the
figure-of-eight mode, which sounds very clean and pure.
Of course many people buy large-diaphragm mics because of their character,
and some models have much more of a 'sound' than others. To me, these new
Rode designs are characterised by a very open and detailed high end, which
is nevertheless properly balanced by the low end. There's nothing thin or
edgy about the sound and, because there's no excessive inherent coloration,
they respond well to EQ — you're not constantly trying to fight

Rode's new designs have really increased expectations of what can be
achieved in microphones at this UK price, particularly when it comes to
circuit noise — they are typically 6-10dB quieter than most of the
competition. You don't get the fudgy warmth of a tube mic or even a
transformer-coupled model, but to my ears this makes it easier to place the
vocals at the front of a mix without using excessive volume.

Despite its low cost, the NT1A delivers professional performance, both for
vocal recording and for general instrument use. The lack of any heavy-handed
presence boost makes the sound well suited for use with a range of singers
and vocal styles and makes it's also easy to fine-tune using modest amounts
of EQ. At the same time, the high end is as open and detailed as you could
wish for, so if you like a vocal sound with a modern breathy quality, you
can achieve it using little or no EQ.

"

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound On
Sound review...???

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever is
- the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and out-and-out lying.

Here's what SOS *really* said:



Forget the cheesey 'cut & paste' BS, Amy - it doesn't work on me, I said
*possibly* in SOS as in:

"Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely simultaneously peaky yet
dull' (or very similar) by someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a
Sound On Sound review...???"


I definitely saw it (or summat very like it) somewhere - it'll come up
again, I expect.

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound
On Sound review...???

Let us not mention the inconvenient fact that the NT-1 has been obsolete for
about half a decade...

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever
is - the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and
out-and-out lying.

Here's what SOS *really* said:

Forget the cheesey 'cut & paste' BS, Amy - it doesn't
work on me,

Right Kitty, the cut and paste is what is known in the trade as reliable
information - an area of polite discussion that you never pollute with your
smelly back-pedaling presence. To you, any inconvenient fact is *cheesy*.
We saw that in your dissembling and false discussion of 3.5 mm phone jacks,
and any number of previous discussions.

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound
On Sound review...???

Let us not mention the inconvenient fact that the NT-1 has been obsolete
for about half a decade...

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever
is - the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and
out-and-out lying.

Here's what SOS *really* said:

Forget the cheesey 'cut & paste' BS, Amy - it doesn't
work on me,

Right Kitty, the cut and paste is what is known in the trade


What trade?


as reliable
information


Sez who - you?


- an area of polite discussion that you never pollute with your
smelly back-pedaling presence.


There's two 'l's in 'back-pedalling'....

Listen, thickness. I have given you multiple opportunities to go back in my
****ter for the greater peace in here (working fine with the other ****s)
or, better yet, I've said several times just say the word and I'll climb in
the ****ter and you can have it all to yourself in here.

So far you haven't had the balls to pull the trigger!

LOL!


To you, any inconvenient fact is *cheesy*.


Don't talk like a ****. What do you know?

Cut and paste is how we in the UK are seeing an ever-increasing annual
outpouring of spearchuckers who say 'dis fing' and 'dat fing' and 'innit'
and yet have all got ****ing *degrees* would you believe!

Note I rely little on cut and paste myself (and never without attribution,
in any case) but rather I post links to sites and to pix - which may not be
quite as safe as they used to be, but are still a lot more open than the
'cut & past' yap....



We


'We' ? - Still got your little invisible friend in bed with you, there?



saw that in your dissembling and false discussion of 3.5 mm phone jacks,
and any number of previous discussions.




You say, do you? Care to point me to an example or just admit it's another
calumny from Audio Usenet's meanest, nastiest little *religious bigot* who,
through Grace, believes he will be saved ...??

LMAO!!!

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote



Right Kitty, the cut and paste is what is known in the trade as reliable
information


How would someone (like you) who is not 'in the trade' know? Why don't you
just stop *bull****ting*?

Amy is a sad old **** who does a bit of freebie recording work for his
church and still tries to draw a 'pro cloak' about himself despite having
run through over and over again by the only true *industry professional*
here!!

Easy enough to resist *forever* with a keyboard I suppose, but if he had
been in the ring, he would be lying in a bloody heap next to the fire
extinguishers by now!!

LOL!

Amy wants attention and have all the nasty soothed away....
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


despite having run through over and over
again by the only true *industry professional* here!!

Citing as an authority someone who can't read a spec sheet and correctly
idenify the size of the headphone jack when it is listed twice as being 3.5
mm seems pretty strange. How many corrections and retries did we give Iain?
3? He never did get it right, now did he!

Good job Amy doesn't do circumcising at his church....
 

Heldensnipper "Amy Krueger" hacked my post to within an
inch of its life and wrote:



"Keith G" wrote in message


despite having run through over and over
again by the only true *industry professional* here!!

Citing as an authority someone who can't read a spec sheet and correctly
idenify the size of the headphone jack when it is listed twice as being
3.5 mm seems pretty strange. How many corrections and retries did we give
Iain? 3? He never did get it right, now did he!



No idea, I wasn't following that thread too closely (it wasn't that
interesting) - but I would say you are somewhat desperately clutching at
straws here!

Btw, you didn't train as a *barber* at any point, did you?

:-))

Rode mic
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound On
Sound review...???

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever is
- the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and out-and-out lying.

Here's what SOS *really* said:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may0...les/rodent.htm

"


Snip.

That's a fine review......

But one thing bothers me, Arny.
If it is such a good mic, and you use it, why
do you get such poor results?

Iain

Rode mic
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

In fact IIRC correrctly - you expound Rode mics do you
not? :-)

Saw them (NT-1 ?) described as being 'strangely
simultaneously peaky yet dull' (or very similar) by
someone, somewhere not long ago - possibly in a Sound
On Sound review...???

If you knew the first thing about using mics, you'd know
they are rarely used 'flat'. One such that hardly ever
is - the u87. One of the industry standards.

Sound on Sound is just a typical comic like Hi-Fi News.

No need to be snowed by Kitty's line of BS and
out-and-out lying. Here's what SOS *really* said:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may0...les/rodent.htm

That's a fine review......

But one thing bothers me, Arny.
If it is such a good mic, and you use it, why
do you get such poor results?

Iain, the posting of the recording was a red herring all along. If I wanted
to portray you as a mean-spirited, small-minded person who ifs full of
hatred and fear and who holds a grudge indefinately, I couldn't have done a
better job on you than you have done to yourself over this little recording.
;-)

Besides, if you were staying awake Iain, you'd know that I recorded Domine
with a NT-4, not a NT 1a. They are very different microphones!