A "tireless loop"? Good one, DUP. Does this mean I'm running on the rims, or that I can jog a 30k without fatigue? Wait. This must be a... a... a... METAPHOR. Why, DUP, I didn't know you did this sort of thing. It's, so...er, un-scientific. So unmeasured. So unproved.

"Code compliant." Great. NOW, I have to worry not only about how the music sounds, but whether or not it is "code compliant." I liked it better before I met you. Things were simpler. Plug it in. Listen. Observe the shortcomings. Plug in and listen again. Keep what sounds best. Ahhh. Wait. What if it's not "code compliant"? Horrors.

Now, THIS cord sounds better. More open. Less hash. Bigger spaces. But, WAIT! DUP says it may not meet UL, ETL, or NEMA standards. Shit. I guess that means it's no good. Even if it sounds better. And, if THAT don't beat all, I may be hearing "air gaps" in my wires.

Or not.

What's a poor music lover to do??

Aha! To the rescue! DUPman! "Here, you poor confused music lover -- I give you a NEMA code approved wire...now, if you'll excuse me, I have a train wreck to untangle on the other side of town."

DUP, you measure your way to bliss. I'll just listen and take my punishment.

How long it has been since I tried a Van Alstine is irrelevant. I have known your irrational and garbled rants for the better part of 2 years. And you push Van Alstine. The Archangel Uriel couldn't persuade me to try another Van Alstine, after your irrational gibberish supporting the fool. He needs to hire another shill. You're chasing people away.

If you have it, I don't want it. You are the anti-advocate, the business repellant.

Mr. Van Alstine, I am so sorry. You hired the wrong man. He merely turns me off. All the fiends in hell couldn't induce me to try another of your amps or preamps in my system. Two years ago, I tried your latest "Transcendent" something-or-other 5, 6, 7, or whatever sequential designation was appropriate to that fleeting moment in time, and it was merely mediocre. DUP has completely destroyed any desire I might entertain, however fleeting, to try some later iteration of your transcendence.

DUP, why continue this?

Remeber i wouldn't know a "good" AC line cord. hahahahahahahaha. I'm still trying to find any references to AC line cords in any "legit" mfg of electrical products that have classified their products in the code category of good sounding AC line cords. The only good sounding AC line cords are in teh ideas of marketing scammers, to whom you seem to think know something. Are you using the reptile generation of AQ or maybe their mountain and river generations? How many volts "bias" sounds best? What a maroooooon. Do line cords from air conditioners sound different than ones from a Milwaukee Hole HAWG......a music lover or a gullible clueless uninformed, technically inept lovely person. Get back to teh basics, and you will begin to understand the absurdity of your good sounding AC line cords. Listened to any good sounding wall outlets recently? Which turbine generator sounds better, since the "experts" claim the AC line cord is at the front of teh system, shouldn't the turbine generator be the source of the sound? A Siemens or GE turbine, which sounds better? What a maroon (BUGS BUNNY reference, which you probably don't get)

Quote:
The only good sounding AC line cords are in teh ideas of marketing scammers, to whom you seem to think know something.

On the days that I shake my head in disbelief when reading and listening to the ravings of those who actively reject well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge, DUP's posts are the best tonic.

Quote:
I'm still trying to find any references to AC line cords in any "legit" mfg of electrical products that have classified their products in the code category of good sounding AC line cords.

Since when did anything "legit" enter into your hifi?

I don't really know what you thought you were saying there, dup, since as usual it makes no sense when you get done destroying the English langauge. Something about codes for sound quality? Since when does the UL do approvals based on sound quality? Which municipality considers sound quality for code approval? How does that code read?

Tell us, O'technically adept one.

Why would code even consider sound quality? You must be advocating a Socialist government policy were the Authorities get to decide which cable you must use. Is that it, dup? And you're the "Authority"! That's a good one, eh, dup? You as an "authority" on anything other than jibberish.

You're really for a Communist takeover of audiophiles? Everyone gets to listen to what dup approves?! That must be it since that's all you talk about. dup as Supreme Ruler and the rest of get to us suffer through the bad sound quality that makes everything sound like a cheap nightclub sound reinforcement system. Sheeesh!

What an igit! (Catch the reference? No, I don't suspect you do.)

Quote:
Get back to teh basics ...

What do codes have to do with sound? Once again you're off on another mindless tear that has no common sense behind it. Once again you'll attack anything that doesn't meet your reference for sound quality when in reality you have no reference for sound quality - just this noise that you dump on these pages when your ears are ringing from listening to that contraption you call a hifi. You can't back up what you print so you resort to insults.

What an igit!!! (Another reference! How many is that now, dup?)

Let's talk about "music lovers", dup. You wouldn't know one if they came and permanently disconnected your equalizer and moved your speakers away from the wall. You wouldn't know what a music lover hears because you only know what crap like Peavey sounds like. When your "reference" is disortion, overdrive and compression what would you know about what a music lover hears? A music lover doesn't feel the need to sit on an audio forum posting the same mindless drivel day in and day out. A music lover loves all music and immerses themself in every sort of music not just the stuff that makes their ears hurt and makes their ears inefffective for the next five days - or forever in your case. A music lover knows the sound of a Yamaha piano and a Steinway and a real music lover knows the sound of a cymbal crashing and rippling into a live acoustic space and not just into one of a dozen microphones to be played back through a lousy sound system with 30% distortion. So let's just leave the "music lover" tag outside of your perview, eh, dup? In your case I'd be insulted if you called me a "music lover" when all you meant was I liked the crap hifi you own.

Let's discuss this, dup, "... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous."

C'mon, dup, you couldn't answer this last time. Give it a try now. 'Cause if an igit like you - sorry - "music lover" like you doesn't have an answer to that statement then you also don't know anything about real "sound quality". If you don't know anything about sound quality - which is obvious - you don't have a clue about the "sound quality" of any component.

This ain't about what anybody else uses, dup, and it ain't about barometric pressure so don't go there. It's all about what you use as a "reference" - such as it is. It's about you not knowing what anything other than deliberate distortion sounds like and then wanting a hifi that sounds like that same distortion. It's all about you insisting I have to like what you like and I can't do that cause you like crap sound quality. And, if that is what you like, then you don't have a clue what music sounds like to the rest of the world.

C'mon, dup, "... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous." Give it a try this time.

Quote:
On the days that I shake my head in disbelief when reading and listening to the ravings of those who actively reject well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge

And who would those people be who "actively reject well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge"? Those people with whom you disagree? That makes them wrong because they disagree with what you think?

Where does "well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge" state that a power cable cannot affect sound quality?

Quote:
And who would those people be who "actively reject well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge"? Those people with whom you disagree?

Actually, no. These are the people who, for example, accept the presence of gravity in the universe, but believe speaker cables are directional. When asked what particular theory of physics would explain this, there is no answer forthcoming. Rather, the retort is that I must be deaf since I can't hear the difference between a cable with arrows on it, and cable without arrows.

Unlike yourself, I try to keep sarcasm out of the conversation.

Some arrows are better than other arrows. What happens if your house is wired in the walls with NM, and all the wires are BACKWARDS!!!!! Your clothes would never get as clean as they should, since your washer is not getting the proper electron bounce, your tv will never have HD to it's full extent, those electrons are jamming up in the improperly arrowed wired....oh wait, NM doesn't have direction, it's WIRE!!!! I had some connectors with arrows stuck on em, from Parts Express, they where about $5 each, I took teh arrows off, and arbitrarily hooked up the wires.......ya know what happened.....it all worked, I then stuck the arrows on the wires and ya know what happened? Nutin, it still worked. I bet the more expensive wires have better labels than MCM or Parts Express. Better arrows for better sound. I was refering to CODE issues in cords as related to teh real world of electrical wiring, where there are UL listed cords for certain applications, ie. hard useage, oil water resistant, you know the stuff based in reality...nothing in any listing at ETL or UL or IEC lists an AC cord as having some kind of sonic attribute, but they do mention insulations for different voltages, envrioments etc, you know that stuff that matters in the real world. Then you have the nudnick speaker directionality wires...that's always a hoot.

Cord directionality is a good one.

However, I do believe in this phenomenon is true for power cords...it's a bear trying to get the prong end into the doo-hickey on the bakck of an amp if you have the 'directionality' wrong.

I don't see my response as any more sarcastic than your's was condescending.

Quote:
Where does "well-known and valid scientific and engineering knowledge" state that a power cable cannot affect sound quality?

Quote:
When asked what particular theory of physics would explain this, there is no answer forthcoming.

The condition would appear to be contagious.

Quote:
I don't see my response as any more sarcastic than your's was condescending.

Round one: sarcasm and condescention tied 1-1.

The obligation is not on me to refute the wild claims made by the audio hobbyists (and I am one as well). Rather, the opposite is required: that 'prove-it' shoe is on their foot.

Talkin' bout' the WIRE itself, before it gets attachments to it. If one can't figa' the gazintas' and gozoutaz' then you are beyond redemption, but probbly a true audiophile, since nutin' would surprise me in audio flake land. I'm surprsed a very clever marketing company didn't come up with having the plugs or receptacles either up or down for changing the way their magic wire sounds...wyh not beyond directionality, but an up or a down when it's in a cable lift....since GRAVITY could be affecting the flow of electrons, and they can make special wires that don't let them drop to the wrong side of the wire...it's an endless market out there for scammers and those who insist on being scammed. orrrrrr DUP'd.

Now this is a TEST, which end is which. And notice all the magic components, RED heat shrink, that's gotta be big dollar$, some expandable wrap, readily available from www.alliedelec.com or other places, buy it by the roll. Some ordinary male and IEC female cord caps, now this is getting into some deeep science so far...and I'm sure, under the wrappers is....some THHN wire or some such readily available by the large 500 foot roll. It might not even be as good as THHN...I'd be curious if it is even rated with any kind of specs on the wire, like the normal stuff has on it. My new wire company is gonna be called Gulliable Wire Research. Our motto is, if you can hear the improvement, you know you have received the Gulliable treatment. And I'll make sure to sell in meters, sounds so much more better, than mere feet. http://www.musicdirect.com/products/images.php?i=-1&p=33808&h=74288 Wonder what color teh garden hose is under the wrapper.....5/8 or 3/4 inch hose?

Now you know RESEARCH went into this setup......artists galore sure do make pretty diagrams. http://www.musicdirect.com/products/images.php?i=-1&p=31379&h=72885

Quote:
I was refering to CODE issues in cords as related to teh real world of electrical wiring, where there are UL listed cords for certain applications, ie. hard useage, oil water resistant, you know the stuff based in reality...nothing in any listing at ETL or UL or IEC lists an AC cord as having some kind of sonic attribute,

That's right, dup, UL listing doesn't mean diddly-squat when it comes to sound quality and neither do building codes. And UL listings have nothing to do with building codes in the real world. Don't you know who Underwriter's Labs is? Wassamatteryou?!

Are you some kind of Igit? Or are you King of the Igits?

Quote:
(UL) is a U.S. for-profit, privately owned and operated product safety testing and certification organization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwriters_Laboratories

They're making a profit off that little stamp of approval. Now that's the way to make sure everything's on the up and up, right, dup? Make some cash doing something that has no bearing on sound quality. That's who I want testing my audio cables!

So, your little divertissement has nothing to do with audio cables as far as sound quality goes. Which means it's a worthless argument that you keep making over and over again because you have nothing else to say. UL doesn't care what your cables do to the sound as long as they don't burn your house down doing it. So why this fascination with UL listing? What do building codes have to do with the cables I use on my hifi? I've had more than one Master Electrician from the City of Dallas listen to my system and never once comment on the cables I use. That would make your ridiculous idea of UL listing and building codes just more BS you have in your head that keeps valauble and correct information from fitting in there too.

Are you fascinated with THX labels too or just UL listings? They both cost money to acquire the stamp of approval but they don't mean a product without their stamp doesn't do the job as well or even better than a product with the seal of approval. It just means the manufacturer didn't pay extra for a stamp that doesn't prove the product's value. The manufactuter saved me some money. Hooray!

If I buy a component made in England, it won't have a UL listing. Does that mean it's going to burn my house down after it makes my system sound lousy? Hmmmmmm?

What do you think, dup? Since you're the expert on UL listing and building codes should I use that spool of Romex between my pre amp and amplifiers? You don't use Romex on your system, do you? Since I'm worried about oil and liquids, should I buy those Hospital Grade connectors you don't like? Why don't you like them, dup? They are what would be proper code for a nighclub where there might be liquid around the electronics. That means you should be using them, dup. They're "professional grade"! Anything that's professional is good, right, dup? Even 30% distortion.

Does this mean it's not about UL approval but it's all about "dup" approval? I hear the jackboots coming now to take away my non-UL listed cables.

OK, let's get back to the one issue you refuse to address.

"... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous."

C'mon, dup, even Alex wants you to answer this. You no answer this, you no belong here either. Chop chop!

Quote:
Round one: sarcasm and condescention tied 1-1.

I didn't hear a bell. We must be listening on dup's system.

How many rounds are we going to go? I like to pace myself when I'm against weaker opponents. Nobody likes a knock out in the second round.

Quote:
The obligation is not on me to refute the wild claims made by the audio hobbyists (and I am one as well). Rather, the opposite is required: that 'prove-it' shoe is on their foot.

Why is that? Because you don't have an answer? Excuse me, but you're the one who brought this subject up for discussion. In polite society that would make it your responsibility to provide an answer. Or, you could just be as impolite as dup and continue on like him to ignore a question he's been asked about ten times now. dup's good company. Just look at all the others who side with him.

Ooooooh, scary thought!

Have you ever tried an aftermarket power cable?

Quote:
I'm sure, under the wrappers is....some THHN wire or some such readily available by the large 500 foot roll.

What?! Now you insist anyone manufacturing cables buy the raw materials in one meter increments?

dup, you sure are silly.

How about, "... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous."

C'mon, dup, try this one out.

What are you afraid of? It's just a question. You're full of answers, this should be a snap for a bright guy like you.

Or, ...

you could just say you don't know what you're talking about and then shut up.

Why do some mfgs decide they call their amps and speakers and pre amplfiers "reference". Using electronics to test electronics, wow, such a novel idea. So a Tektronix scope or Fluke meter used to test and electronic ckt, how can that possibly be logical....Ever hear of NIST. They use certain equipment, for testing, of stuff they then list as a STANDARD. REFERENCE. If you don't understand anything about standards and reference materials, you truly are a clueless wonder. How come when the reviewer at Stereophile calls his stuff his REFERENCE system, to which he compares what he is writing about. Take you for instance, one could use BOZO the clown as a reference to comprae you to. BOZO being a CLOWN, and you are getting real close to being considered just that. Do you understand anything in the real world, on how stuff is mfg'd designed, having to meet standards and code requirements. No one said anything about UL having anything to do with sound quality, But guess what, they do in fact test and list for it's intended use, audio equipment. Look into it, many places of public accomidation can't install stuff if it's not a Ul or ETL or simialr agency tested, listed for it's purpose. you are truly BOZO material. According to your logic on this using amps to test amps, then all reviews are invalid in all the magaiznes that compare one item to another. They should all go home, and find a new job. Of course they ain't comparing it to a mini watt single driver system for somthing being used to reproduce lifelike and realistic music at home. clock radios ain't that realistic, unless it is from Radio Shack, then it's REALISTIC, ain't that your REFERENCE?

Jan is also clueless. I buy something made in England is it gonna burn my house down, with you it might since it's set for 240V and you wouldn't know and you would change the cord and plug it in...Europe has CE, IEC and UL is working on the similar standards as IEC related stuff. Better yet buy it here and take it to Canada without a proper agency sticker, it can be disallowed to be installed, in many commercial locations stuff has to be modified to meet their code requiments, you are also clueless. Ever hear of UL c Duh UL canada and they have CSA which is working along with UL to standarize. Use some non listed components in a commercial venue, have a problem, people get hurt, kiss your wallet goodbye, what a Maroooooon. It doesn't need to be rated for hard use, people walking all over teh wires, it sounds good.......funny dudes, clueless, but entertaining

Ahhh, dup, little pin headed foul mouthed dup, it doesn't take you long to resort to personal insults when you don't have a clue what is being discussed.

What a maroon!!!!!!

Is that it, dup? You think this, "... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous" refers to a multimeter?

What an igit!!!

Read the first eight words (fingers or toes, it doesn't matter how you count them) and think again.

Wait a minute ... I just have to do this ...

I am ROTFLMAO at dup.

And turn down that rotten overgrown car stereo you have in that room!

OK!

dup, you have one more chance. I'm not going to sit here and read your jibberish all day just to give you some attention. Get someone to pay attention to you on your own time! Have I ever heard of NIST? You mean the National Institute of Stupid Twits? Yeah, I see your picture is on their masthead.

One more chance, dup and then it's just one more time you can't answer a basic question. One more time you can't figure out the words in front of you. One more time you don't belong on a discussion forum. One less time anyone has to listen to you and your ranting, insane mumblings.

"... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous"

C'mon, dup, read it slow and form the words as you read them. And don't get rude with me 'cause I will get just as rude with you. And nobody really wants to read that. If you can't provide an answer, then just say so and shut up! Very simple, dup. Just say you don't have a clue.

Quote:
Better yet buy it here and take it to Canada without a proper agency sticker, it can be disallowed to be installed, in many commercial locations stuff has to be modified to meet their code requiments, you are also clueless.

I admit I am clueless - clueless as to how that has anything to do with anything we've been discussing. You got me there, dup. Throw it in from the left field bleachers, eh? And not even a baseball! Some weird little thing that squirms and stinks and spits at you. Awww, you're a sly one, mr.dup! We aren't discussing commercial installations, you nit! We aren't discussing shipping anything to Canada! What a dork!

DORK!

DORK!!!

Why don't you just read the sentence, dup, and give it your best shot. 'Cause if that's your best, you should start writing McCain advertisements.

What an igit!

What was the question? I see a quote. How do I answer a STATEMENT. A question would have a ? after it. you keep re doing the QUOTE, it's a statement, I don't see a question there. I'm clueless on this one. are you refering to having standrds, to which things are measured against? Everything begins compared to a reference standard. Matta' of fact my job entails insturments that are all calibrated to standards, without which they couldn't possibly give useable results. So are you infering with this QUOTE that amps and speakers don't have references to which they are mfg'd? Then someone's 12" speaker couldn't fit in what someone else considered a 12" hole. About the size in your head, cus' I think I can see through it. Explain to me, what that quote is refering to? Cus it must be taken out of context, I'm trying to decode it, but since it came from you, the code is tough to break. Explain, in real simple terms, cus' I'm SIMPLE. And I just bought a pie.

Buddha, you need a bi-directional aDUPtor that's code compliant. Then you'll be able to turn that hose around.

Marketing idea. We'll make millions. A mini-system that fits in your pocket, with earplugs. It consists of an amplifier, an equalizer, an ADC, a DAC, and a microphone. You take it to the symphony (or any other concert, I guess). Then, as the orchestra plays, the microphone picks up the sound, the ADC converts it to digital, then the equalizer adjusts the tonal balance (everybody knows that live sound is tonally out of whack), then the DAC takes the signal to the amplifier, then the sound goes into your head via the earphones.

This way, you can have the live experience (conductors jumpin' around, shakin' their heads, and wavin' their arms, and all, musicians sawin' away and blastin' their cheeks off), without having to put up with the distortions inherent in live music.

As an accessory (additional bucks, of course), you could have Ethan miniaturize his room-tuners so as to wrap around the back of your head while resting on a neck brace. That way, you wouldn't have to put up with concert hall acoustics.

What do you think? If ever an idea was ripe for our times, this is it!

Sorry to edit this, but the ideas just keep coming. For surround sound we could add additional nose and mouth speakers. For bass reinforcement, a fifth speaker could fit up your ass. For those subsonic frequencies you can only feel. All extra cost, but the deluxe model always costs more, eh?

If you haven't had a clue what you were supposed to be responding to, what have you been responding to?

What is this? You just jabber and suppose that's an answer to something?! Good grief, dup, you get more unbelievable every day. Response, answer, retort, rebuttal, antiphon - don't you understand basic English, dup? The question was posed here, http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...part=1&vc=1 and you ignored it then. Find the statement and the questions posed around the statement and respond. I'm tired of this game, dup.

This has nothing to do with acoustic instruments. This has nothing to do with barometric pressure or the microphones used to record a symphony orchestra.

Quote:
... to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous.

There's the statement. The questions are in that thread. Do your best, eh, dup.

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/bizzyb/ILJPOWER.html This guy says your expensive power cords are mis wired, nothing like a hot on a nuetral....we wire for fire, but it must sound good. It's MAGIC wires, with special features, but nothing along basic electrical safety. Jan, where in teh link is teh QUESTION...I'm really confused now. I must be as dopey as you, is that possible?

Quote:

Why is that? Because you don't have an answer? Excuse me, but you're the one who brought this subject up for discussion. In polite society that would make it your responsibility to provide an answer. Or, you could just be as impolite as dup and continue on like him to ignore a question he's been asked about ten times now. dup's good company. Just look at all the others who side with him.

Hmm. This isn't going so well. I don't know why you are so angry. I guess you and DUP have been in a long running battle.

To state the obvious: science advances when a new theory on subject X is proposed: the proponent lays out his theory with supporting evidence. If the theory is supported through additional trials/experiments which usually attempt to test the initial evidence, then the theory is incorporated into the body of work in the subject...and things advance.

I don't know many examples when a theory is laid out with no evidence...just a demand to be believed.

So one more time: if someone believes, for example, that speaker cables are directional, or that AC cords impact the representation of music via the chain of audio components, then it is up to that person to provide the evidence. That evidence will be tested by others.

I am not sure if I have met, or will ever meet your benchmark for politeness. You show very little of that in the posts I have read. But again, you may have been ranting against DUP for months or years, and I have simply been caught up in your backdraft. I don't know DUP and for all I know, the question you have asked 10 times may be of little consequence to him and not deserve a reply.

Meantime, enjoy the weekend.

Quote:
For bass reinforcement, a fifth speaker could fit up your ass. For those subsonic frequencies you can only feel.

I think you've invented a high end cavity resonator.

This will be perfect for porn night at AlexO's!

What would be a good cable for ass placement?

More importantly, what type of plug? One would hope it would be hospital grade.

When did I attend a LIVE music event? Is that a question I am supposed to get out of a quote? Made by someone else? Daffy Duck would be considered a PhD compared to the cryptic verbage done by Jan. Live music at least once a week, soemtimes 3 events in one week when I have ENERGY. Up front and close, actually lately I've been recording the stuff, comes out really great.....then when I play it back here, on a "reference" system, hey why not it's an over used buzz wurd. It sound like the live event. Use some great mics, a nice recorder, and the excellent musicans that are smokin'!!! www.mattoree.com Why do you sit so far away like 5th row, , get in there, up close and personal.....

Quote:
So one more time: if someone believes, for example, that speaker cables are directional, or that AC cords impact the representation of music via the chain of audio components, then it is up to that person to provide the evidence. That evidence will be tested by others.

The "evidence" is provided when someone acknowledges hearing something unlike what they heard previous to the introduction of the cable.

You must really suck as "Where's Waldo".

Here's the source of the quotation; Re: Is it REAL? Or is it hi fi? [Re: DUP]
#45004 - 07/21/08 10:13 PM

And here are the questions;

Quote:
In dup's case he needs to address the deliberate distortion of the sound created within the amplification chain used by the performers/recording engineers and how that makes for a "reference" sound he finds to be of value. When the "reference" employed can be altered by nothing more than the "master/tone/gain" settings on the amplifier used or the type, age and microphonics of tube inserted in that amplifier there can be no real "reference". If dup wants to use the sound of a Stratocaster as his "reference", he then must describe what that sound is when played back with the effects allowed by the instrument (which pickup and what volume/tone settings), the amplification (which settings on the volume/tone/gain controls which affect the feedback loop of the amplifier and thus the deliberate distortion of the instrument's "sound", the "sound" of the various amplifiers used, the addition of effects such as WahWah?, Chorus?, Reverb?, "Crunch"?, etc. along with the various drivers which could be used in a cabinet - a single Celestion 12" sounding quite unlike a pair or quad of 15" Emminence drivers even when both are used with the same instrument and head amp) and recording chain (direct injection, from the board or house feed, compression, limiting, chorus effect, EQ, etc.) used to make his "reference" materials. The variables of electronic instrumental sounds are virtually limitless and therefore not capable of being used as a true "reference" (which is, I believe, Holt's essential conflict with non-acoustic instruments used as reference material), the issue being they can serve only as confirmation of the sound a listener "likes" but does not know.

It is all an illusion which dup then further manipluates to his own idiosyncratic tastes to cover up the problems he finds in his playback system. That is being neither an objectivist nor a subjectivist, it's merely an uneducated, willful child playing with the knobs.

This is not so when the reference is a symphony orchestra or chamber music played on unamplified instruments within a "live" acoustic performance space no matter what microphones were employed. To rely on such a weak provision as the "sound" of microphones to buttress his case for "live references" only betrays the unsubstantial nature of dup's knowledge and his argument.

This doesn't have anything to do with the microphones used to record a piano or an orchestra. dup is ignoring the dozen or so dissimilar microphones used to flavor the recording of just the drum kit on his "reference discs" in favor of arguing against the possibility of two or three similar microphones used to record an entire 120 piece orchestra. It doesn't take a genius to find the holes in dup's argument it only takes someone unwilling to see those holes in their own "logic" to believe the stuff dup posts and posts and posts over and over again.

How ever teh LIVe event was created, using whatever instruments, if you want that same thign at home, you need it done properly...if the sound at teh lvie event was a Les Paul or a Gretsch, throguh a certain amp, which has it's own sound, of distrted TUBES, then ya want that reproduced at home....And since I have the actual recording of the live event, that is what i can create, THE LIVE EVENT, from teh master recordings, can't get much better than playing back teh original recordings..and it sounds like the LIVE event!!! Without the spilled drinks on my mic cords. Whatever was used to create the original event, doesn't matter what, to reproduce it exactly at home is what hi fi is all about..your obsession with only non electric is absurd....a B3 is electronic, no other way around it, that's it sound...has been since day one.....are you that dense? The Les Paul IS and electric guitar, meant to be electrified, so the sound is what it is...now reproduce it at home, not with 35w clock radios or no driver speakers, cus it ain't gonna happen, BLOSE has made a fortune convincing the easily led it's possible, so you think a BLOSE is hi fi? Well don't you use teh same small drivers he sells? Every bass note is 80 Hz, no matter what it really is, boom boom boom....Rudy Valli sung through a megaphone, it gave him that unique sound in his voice, guess that's not real either, he enhanced his vocals with a megaphone, at teh time that was high tech, now reproduce that at home...Mammy...The acoustics of a hall change teh sound of human voice, I bet you sitting 5 row center, it don't sound like it would if you where 2 feet away from him or teh instument...if you ain't playing the insturment, how do you then know EXACTLY how it sounds, you are in front of it, not playing it.....whcih is teh ultimate reference, that no one has, except the original player....so everything is false?

To steal from the Bard...

In Hi Fi, it works thusly: 'Power cords matter because I think power cords matter.'

End of requirements of proof, but YMMV.

Rvance, a washable one. A cable that won't deteriorate with repeated visits to the laundromat. One with a, ahem, pleasant feel about it. Still, it must be capable of passing signal (bet you all were looking for another direct object, eh?)

Small cavities could be reinforced with a bit of vibrational boost. Large cavities could let the room space even out irregularities.

Above all, sound quality is the prime desideratum. Comfort is secondary. Cavity resonance matters only if you are interested in side effects. Mainly, I just want the music. But, you don't want Gene's problem, to wit --

There once was a man named Gene
Who invented a fucking machine.
Both concave and convex,
It would do either sex,
But, O, what a bastard to clean.

First, do no harm.

So, "...whatever was used to create the live event doesn't matter..."

Then you move on to various examples of electronically simulated "live events."

Brilliant. Just brilliant. Les Paul's (Gretsch? Is that a German beer? Oh. Sorry. GROELSCH) amplified guitar is an example of a live event. Ummm. See my invention idea. "Whatever is used to create the original event...is what hi fi is all about."

Okay. I'll bite. Where do I get me one of those "whatevers"? If that's what it's all about, I want one. I have a funny feeling that Legacy and Van Alstine are the answers.

DUP, your syntax and spelling are SO fucked up that nobody can make sense out of any of your postulations.

Maybe ESL. No. I will NOT volunteer for the duty.

Mammy. Oh, lord. Rescue me. Please.

The ultimate reference is the copy of a non-reference. Huh?

Listen. Buddha and I (I haven't heard from him yet, but I'll include him in the deal until he denies responsibility) have JUST the device for you. It is still on the drawing board, but we can whip up a prototype in less time than it takes you to misspell "the." No shit. We can do this. You will NEVER have to listen to the event behind the "original recording" again. You'll have the original recording. LIVE!!!

Only 5,000 rapidly-depreciating-US-dollars. Wait. There's more. We will give you a great deal on your Van Alstine/Legacy mish-mash. $4.98. This will cover tax and half of shipping. You can't ask for anything more fair than that. C'mon. Rid yourself of this "original event" albatross, forever. We can put YOU in the catbird seat, when it comes to live concerts. No more agonizing over the details.

Small drivers. Hmmph! We'll give you bass reinforcement to DIE for. We are working on a replica of a full-sized bassoon. And it's washable!

Keep this on the QT, Dupster. We don't want to overshoot our original production quotas.

An electric guitar played LIVE should sound teh same way when I play it at home, and certainly when it's the recording of that playing, which I have.... So according to you guys, the only instruments that should ever be played live are things not mic'd or amp'd or given any kind of PA, well, the world would be mighty dull if all we got was piano concerts by Yannie. And there should be no recordings of these things ssince they are getting mic's and electrified, couldn't possibly any good. I bet you would just love some acoustic lutes!!! Now that's a reference

You know what, dup, you're useless on a discussion forum. You badger me for the link to the article because the quote must have been taken out of context and then it's obvious you haven't read the article. You've barely read the quote and have not understood what is says. We're supposed to read all the crap you put on the forum but you can't read one article that might say something you don't want to hear.

You've only spouted the same three ideas you have in your head - sorry, four ideas, your little child ego had to get a slam in about my system, didn't it? Everything is to be ridiculed if it isn't already cemented in your rationalisation. You couldn't carry on a real discussion if your life depended on it.

You don't address the idea of the article and you are nearly incomprehensible while not discussing the statement. You make an argument there can be no reference because everything is recorded and then you want to use your recordings as a reference. How does it work both ways, dup? Honest to God, dup, I've never seen anyone with such a convoluted thought process as you pull out of your butt every post.

dup, you don't belong on a discussion forum.

Groelsch ain't German it's DUTCH and you have teh nerve to correct ME!

I'm now more confused...what is a "reference"? First only live un amplified stuff according to some bizzare idea.....But if you are listening to recordings at home, of a live event, or live in a studio, how do you know what is was? In my case I have teh recordings of teh live event that i was actually at. Therefore, in order to use any thing LIVE as a reference, you now according to my DOCTRINE, must have teh actual live recording of teh event, otehr wise, you have no idea of what really went on, but then, if i move teh mic here or there it changes everything anyway, it all sounds different, turn teh mic a few inches, all different, YET, you think you can memorize what some live event sounded livke years ago, when you listen to an entirely differetn event..how retarded is THAT? anyway, so how is just non electrica any more a reference than anythign else? You don't haveany idea how it sounded LIVE, you are only listening to a recording of something, teh mics coulda' been anywhere someone else decided sounds good, or better or worse...acoustic non amplified is no more a reference than anything else....it is merely an attemp to justify crappy equipment that sounds like crap Everyone must now only tell me how it sounds if you where at teh actual event, have teh actual live, un mixed recording of that same event, and know everything in the recording chain, since mics sound different etc. And you certainly ain't getting anything near anything that was live reproduced out of a single tiny speaker with clock radio watts..... the acosutic energy alone non amplifed is so much greater than some dinky clock radio speaker can deliver, let alone mini watts driving it, once you get over the hurdle of being completely confused and not understanding the basics, you will be on the road to recovery...of having a tin ear. Your thought process defys logic, and anything resembling reality.

That would indicate a poorly designed component that has issues with dealing with loads presented to it. I have 16 different XLR cables, they all sound the same, what's wrong then? Nothing, cus' as long as they are the correct connector and wire for the purpose things work. You certainly ain't hearing wire on a midrange speaker, on an amp that has in excess of 3% THD, how on this planet, can you say you can hear wire!!!? You gotta be putting us on, right...you just being funny

I don't know what that last post refers to, dup, it is just one more of your ridiculous little "concepts" that prove you can't hear but that you allow to continually rattle in your otherwise empty skull. But, yeah, this is what any "discussion" with you turns into. There's no "discussion". You don't stay on point. You have four ideas that you repeat and repeat and repeat ad nauseam. Anything that isn't what you own or what you've decided is right is ridiculed. But you can't even comprehend when someone with any authority on the subject spells out for you why you are wrong. Remember the Elliott article? He states one thing and explains why your approach is incorrect and you insist he's validating your opinion. You can't even read and you can't type. The same old crap over and over and over that we're supposed to read but you won't even take the time to read one sentence and get the idea from a few words. You don't belong on a discussion forum.

And with that overblown car stereo of yours, if what you recorded actually sounded like the real thing, you wouldn't need a graphic equalizer with +/- 12dB boost and cut to make the sound liveable. If you think it sounds right with the graphic eq, then you are immune to the 24dB of comb filter effects it introduces and you don't have a clue what the sound was like when you made the recording. If you don't hear the 24dB of comb filtering in your eq, then you must be using microphones with 24dB of comb filtering. Whichever way it is, you don't know what the sound was like because you screw with it when you play it back. If you don't screw with it, you don't like it. Everything is built around one thing - SLAM! - and you don't care what else is required to build a quality system. You don't have a clue why Holt insists on the sound of acoustic instruments or how non-acoustic instruments fit into that scheme because your "references" are so limited that any system that plays loud will suffice. Which doesn't make for an accurate reference for anyone other than that guy in the purple '92 Buick that drives by my house. But you don't need a reference because everything is built around what you think is right even when it's not - which is as screwed up as your equalizer. And that's just a small part of what Holt was talking about in that article. But you'll never know because you won't read the article since it contradicts what makes you comfortable. Even if you did read the article, you can't engage in a discussion without ridiculing everything. I've read all you BS and that's all it is - BS with lots of stink attached.

You don't belong here.

Quote:
I don't know what that last post refers to, dup, it is just one more of your ridiculous little "concepts" that prove you can't hear but that you allow to continually rattle in your otherwise empty skull. But, yeah, this is what any "discussion" with you turns into. There's no "discussion". You don't stay on point. You have four ideas that you repeat and repeat and repeat ad nauseam. Anything that isn't what you own or what you've decided is right is ridiculed. But you can't even comprehend when someone with any authority on the subject spells out for you why you are wrong. Remember the Elliott article? He states one thing and explains why your approach is incorrect and you insist he's validating your opinion. You can't even read and you can't type. The same old crap over and over and over that we're supposed to read but you won't even take the time to read one sentence and get the idea from a few words. You don't belong on a discussion forum.

Yet you, and your superior intellect continue to try to converse with him.

Now answer the question Jan.

What does that say about you?

RG

That I give everyone another chance to prove they are worth what I believe they can be. You should know that from seeing me sell.

But I assume you truly meant that post as just another insult since I do not fully "appreciate" dup the way you do.

This is an important topic and one that has given JA a fair amount of grief long term and recently with his recording of Attention Screen. It's worth debating but not with someone who won't even read the article and cannot comprehend the one sentence provided.

German. Dutch. It's all Greek to me. I just drink the shit and try to remember what tasted good. Sort of like listening to music.

"Teh" sounds like Sanskrit, DUP, not English. "Teh" ain't English, it's Sanskrit. And you have the nerve to correct ME!

DUP, after reading your bullshit for the better part of 3 years, I am in unabashed awe of your ability to prove, time after time, in an infinite variety of ways (stylistic, logical, and...O, let me count the ways...) what no one responding to you can absolutely prove, that you are an absolute dildo-brain of the lowest possible order.

The only reason we keep arguing with you, DUP, is to admire your infinite range of unintentional self-abasing techniques. Each of your responses is a new revelation of what depths the semi-human intellect can plumb.

That is, if nobody argued with you, you would probably shut up. But where's the fun in that? Rave on, DUP, show us more of your (seemingly) inexhaustible repertoire of mental deficiencies.

I sit in awe.

Clifton,

This is NOT directed to your post, but an observation of what's happening with many of the recent posts to this thread, not to mention other threads on this GR&R topic.

Scott Foglesong initiated this thread regarding audiophilia and a quasi- one of that. Discussion proceeded for three pages through July 28 in a reasonably cordial and productive manner. Then this thread degenerated from there for seven pages and counting. Scott has not posted since, as far as I can tell.

This has happened at least once before in The Entry Level when a newbie got interested in the forum. When he was insulted, he responded in a post entirely written in capital letters, and apparently has not returned, again as far as I can tell based upon the infrequent times I look here.

Is this the way it has to be? If so, people coming here will lose interest and just go somewhere else, when we want to attract more interest to this rewarding hobby. They may even get the impression that high-end-audio enthusiasts are normally as unwelcoming as this.

Those of us here who keep quiet and stay out of the fray are under-represented, and our absent, but otherwise would have been relevant and reasoned posts, are not seen by those newbies who are being driven away by the hostile posts.

WTL, you put my name on your post, so I'll answer. The thread was initiated with inconsequential banter. No issues, other than a tentative reference to power cables, were seriously engaged.

Mr. Foglesong made up a clever term ("audioquasiphilia") and obviously felt proud of it. Further, he wanted us to know he was a Professor of Music, and he wanted us to read his newspaper column. Which we did.

He was welcomed to the forum. By Buddha and others.

Then DUP, Ethan, I, and Jan jumped in (I have a Pablo records recording of Count Basie called "Lester Leaps in" -- one of the great 15 minutes in the history of jazz -- but we ain't doin' the riffs, and this ain't jazz ). With their/my separate agendas. Being an ardent fan of DUP's unashamed willingness to display his aggressive stupidity, I (of course) just had to enter the fray.

Maybe "those of us who keep quiet" and are "under-represented" should, er, (I believe the modern term is...) represent .

Don't worry about the newbies. DUP was a newbie, once.

DUP is always looking for a fight. And I have no problem with throwin' down. If this bothers you, then represent.

Others have tried to reason with DUP. I, included. DUP sees such attempts as signs of weakness. DUP is the only regular poster on this site who has to be right. There is no give in him. No syntactical sense, either...but that's another topic.

So, while sympathetic to your point of view, to a limited extent, I have no idea how slamming the eminently slammable DUP is, somehow, going to discourage others from participating in our "rewarding hobby." If you love music, it doesn't matter who goes to the mat. If you love conflict, tell DUP that cables matter and Van Alstine + Legacy are not the only possible choices for high fidelity in the home.

As they stand, your comments are too vague to criticize or to agree with. You are uncomfortable with the verbal violence. That shouldn't be a problem.

Happy tunes.

Jan doesn't understand much, if a system can play LOUD as in realistic levels it's somehow no good? What a confused individual. If all you attend is acoustic events, you are again clueless in the realitys of live music. Take a meter with you at a live orchestra event. Wake up, and realize that the 88dB levels of a flute is not what music is all about. Lutes played for the queen is not music that anyone listens to either. Anyone using mid range driver as full range is hardly understanding full range dynamics of live sound. And ONe mid where on this planet do you hear live music that is so constrained, lifeless and clock radio like, even a 3 pice acoustic group would have dynamics far beyond the capabiltys of a 35W 3% THD into 5 inch speaker, are you totaly smoked in the thought process. Do you also think a 48HP VW Beetle from 1961 is a great ride?

Quote:

Others have tried to reason with DUP. I, included. DUP sees such attempts as signs of weakness. DUP is the only regular poster on this site who has to be right. There is no give in him. No syntactical sense, either...but that's another topic.

So, while sympathetic to your point of view, to a limited extent, I have no idea how slamming the eminently slammable DUP is, somehow, going to discourage others from participating in our "rewarding hobby." If you love music, it doesn't matter who goes to the mat. If you love conflict, tell DUP that cables matter and Van Alstine + Legacy are not the only possible choices for high fidelity in the home.

Clifton, you say these things about DUP as a matter of course, but I have not found this to be the case with DUP at all. I have my disagreements with DUP. I told him that I thought that cables mattered, I told him that I didn't think his Van Alstine DAC was all that. Yet, I find him to be cordial and quite agreeable. I don't think he's wrong across the board, just as I don't agree with everything that he says across the board. He has many valid points and he exaggerates some as well. Yet, I haven't found him to be this Lochness Monster you make him out to be.

If you find yourself being drawn into stupidity, keep in mind that it takes two to tango.

Cliffy, that's was beautiful. Did you write that before or after drinking the good tasting "shit". Being right most of the time is better than being wrong all the time, ain't it Cliffy?