Quote:
There's nothing intrinsically bad about electronically produced music, as long as it doesn't try to imitate acoustical instruments (which it does poorly). On the other hand, it has no relevance to the audio concept of fidelity or accuracy or realism, because it has no existence in non-electronic reality. You cannot hear it except through amplifiers and loudspeakers, and to use the sound of amplifiers and loudspeakers for the evaluation of amplifiers and loudspeakers is ridiculous.

Quote:
Different orchestras sound different, different halls sound different, different seating locations sound different, and microphones are placed where no one ever sits anyway. The "absolute sound" of an orchestra is, rather, a range of sounds, but the limits of this range define rather unequivocally what it is possible for a real, live orchestra to sound like.

This is the only criterion by which the fidelity of sound reproduction can be assessed. You can use a musically accurate system to evaluate the sound quality of an electronically produced recording, but you cannot use an electronically produced recording to evaluate a system unless you are already familiar enough with what the recording really sounds like to make such a judgment.

Quote:
One of the attractions of electronic music is the almost limitless variety of sounds that can be gotten from a single "instrument," through what is called signal processing. But this means there is no longer any such thing as the "correct" sound for any instrument, and without that, there can be no way of judging what a musical sound is supposed to sound like.

Quote:
The perfect reproduction of an acoustical instrument lies at the top of the statistician's bell-shaped curve, with varying degrees of inaccuracy to the left or right of that peak. So the only way you can judge tonal accuracy is by comparing what you hear with what you remember about the sound of the live, acoustical instrument.

http://stereophile.com/asweseeit/111/

Quote:
Electrostatics like Magnaplanrs are deficient big time, it cannopt reproduce the full slam impact and dynamics of a120 piece orchestra ...

Some of us have more than one criteria for what makes reproduction approach reality. That you refuse to accept that means you are in the wrong location.

And quoting ad copy is not convincing.

Quote:
You ain't heard Whispers, otherwise you wouldn't be making such dopey remarks. Whispers are the closet thing you can get that is priced for mortals, that deliver live anything, whether it's electric guitar, acoustic guitar or piano.....how can you continue to claim that only acoustic insturments are teh defining criteria for what a reproduction is referenced to? Everything you playback at home is electric...the recordings are doen with hundreds of feet of wires, all kinds of ckts.....are you that out of touch with reality? How come the electric RECORDING of a piano is something you can hear the difference in but if it's an electric guitar then there is no tone differences? You can tell what piano was being recorded, by teh tone, of course any tone coulda been modified by what mics they used, what mic pre amps, who was listening to teh playback when they were finailizing teh mix, but you know exactly how it sounded when they recorded it, even though you weren't there. But if it's an electric guitar, then it's all teh same so it don't matter? What planet do you do most of this listening? Cus you are way out in space. Electrostatics like Magnaplanrs are deficient big time, it cannopt reproduce the full slam impact and dynamics of a120 piece orchestra, they will snap crackle pop, WHISPERS give it all, full range, you mighta heard Whispers run off a underpowered amplifier? If you even ever heard em at all, which I doubt, otherwise you would never make such statements. How do you know what piano is being played without looking at teh notes on teh recording? It's all electrified getting it onto the recording, according to your bizzare ideas. Do you also know what every mic sounds like too?

You create more distortion than a Class "D" amp. I HAVE NEVER said ONE negative word about the Whispers. Unlike you I don't render my opinion on gear unless I've spent a lot of time with it.

Let me make this perfectly clear I'm not questioning your speakers, or any other piece of your gear. I'm questioning your approach to audio and your priorities. I don't blame machines for the failings of men.

Quote:
I just had a flash back...low powered heavily distored tubes dring a mid range acting liek a full system?

The only thing more colored than your memory is your hifi.

Quote:

Quote:
I just had a flash back...low powered heavily distored tubes dring a mid range acting liek a full system?

The only thing more colored than your memory is your hifi.

Speaking of shrieking, it's lucky that DUP had AlexO and Stew come by and work on his system so that DUP can claim to have heard what the Whispers can do!

Give DUP some room, he's only been listening to Hi Fi for a month or two now.

Maybe we should look back in time to how DUP's gear sounded...

From AlexO's Big Adventure:

"The first disk DUP played for us was the Stevie Ray Vaugn and BB King SACD. It sounded like crap! Mid bass suckout, bright to the point of being shrill, absolutely painful. I figured our day will be short. Wait... what? WHAT??? You got an equalizer in the system??? Turn that shit off!!! I want to listen to your system, not your interpretation of what music should sound like. Jayzuzzzz! Ok, EQ off."

Or this one:

"The biggest problem I had with DUP's system is that it sounds as though the music is coming at you from 6' above your seating position."

(Maybe it's the House of Blues - Chicago vibe?)

Onward...

"...you can tell which driver is playing the music. This is indeed a 4 way speaker with a very complex crossover. This is not your planar, electrostatic or a single driver speaker, with that perfect, smooth transition from low to high frequency. This speaker tells you that it's a 4 way design. It doesn't scream it out, but it does whisper."

DUP, that's from people who have heard your system, dude!

No criticizing Jan until you get your own house in order!

Quote:
I have lotsa criteria for what sounds LIVE

No, you don't. Your "criteria" amounts to owning stuff that sounds like a sound reinforcement system put in a room that's too small for the system. That's my goal, having my system sound like a club's sound reinforcement system. I'm going to do that - right after I stick my foot in my lawnmower blade.

And just saying the same meaningless crap over and over again doesn't make it any more realistic. You can't participate in a real debate because all you have are your silly little stock phrases and set in concrete ideas that belong with your overgrown car stereo. 5,000 watts and 24 drivers?! Jeeze!

Juvenile, boorish and inaccurate insults about tubes when you use them too is just more proof you don't belong here and that you don't get it.

You do not have a clue and couldn't buy one on a bet with someone helping you. And somebody here mistakenly thinks you didn't take your freebie interconnects and stick that EQ right back in your system as soon as Alex left. You're making this up as you go along.

ROTFL

Here's the debate, dup, respond to this and knock off the asinine comments. Leave out the stuff that doesn't rebut this statement. Nothing about microphones and strings on pianos. You don't know what you're talking about when you go there so just stick to this ...

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

Hey Buddha,

If you're going to drag me into this, then put things in perspective:

Whereas I didn't think the Whispers were perfect, DUP's system did sound better than Stew's Nova Utopias for $40k. In fact, Stew was so impressed with the Whispers that he's in the process of replacing his Nova Utopias with the Whispers. Furthermore, I think that the Whispers are giant killers. They don't have the smooth driver transition of the Planars or Electrostats and they don't have quite the midrange of either, but they are much more dynamic, with deep, articulate, tight bass and they have planar like air about them.

I also think that the Whispers are the best under 20k speakers I've heard. In fact, they only speakers that better them are the Avantgarde Trios with the bass horns (around 70-100k).

When I wrote my impressions of DUP's system, I tried to outline all that I heard. DUP's system isn't perfect, which I mentioned, but it's VERY, VERY good. So, don't take my comments out of context to make it seem as though DUP is some type of an audio buffoon. He may have very unorthodox ideas, but his system is the best I've heard for the money.

Quote:

Quote:
I just had a flash back...low powered heavily distored tubes dring a mid range acting liek a full system?

The only thing more colored than your memory is your hifi.

No, it's his spelling.

Kal

Quote:
Hey Buddha,

If you're going to drag me into this, then put things in perspective:

Whereas I didn't think the Whispers were perfect, DUP's system did sound better than Stew's Nova Utopias for $40k. In fact, Stew was so impressed with the Whispers that he's in the process of replacing his Nova Utopias with the Whispers. Furthermore, I think that the Whispers are giant killers. They don't have the smooth driver transition of the Planars or Electrostats and they don't have quite the midrange of either, but they are much more dynamic, with deep, articulate, tight bass and they have planar like air about them.

I also think that the Whispers are the best under 20k speakers I've heard. In fact, they only speakers that better them are the Avantgarde Trios with the bass horns (around 70-100k).

When I wrote my impressions of DUP's system, I tried to outline all that I heard. DUP's system isn't perfect, which I mentioned, but it's VERY, VERY good. So, don't take my comments out of context to make it seem as though DUP is some type of an audio buffoon. He may have very unorthodox ideas, but his system is the best I've heard for the money.

Prediction:

Stew will put the new speakers into the same old room and wonder why his new pair of Whispers doesn't sound as good as he thinks it should.

AlexO, how can "sounds like crap" be the best you've heard for under 20 large speakers?

My main point was that DUP hadn't really heard his system until you took his equalizer out of the loop.

Quote:

Prediction:

Stew will put the new speakers into the same old room and wonder why his new pair of Whispers doesn't sound as good as he thinks it should.

Based on what we heard at the dealer, Stew expects the Whispers to sound like his Nova Utopia's do in his room.

Quote:
AlexO, how can "sounds like crap" be the best you've heard for under 20 large speakers?

Read what I wrote. He had the EQ running. When he had the EQ in, I thought it sounded like crap. When he took the EQ out, it sounded great.

Quote:

My main point was that DUP hadn't really heard his system until you took his equalizer out of the loop.

Either that or he heard his system and decided that he liked it better with EQ. It's back to the old objectivist/subjectivist argument. DUP customized the sound of his system to make it pleasing to him. I don't see anything wrong with that just as I don't see anything wrong with a single driver speaker system if that's what floats your boat.

I think where the whole argument centers around is the fact that DUP customizes the sound of his system to his liking and then proclaims that he's an objectivist. However, that doesn't take away from the fact that his system is VERY good. The Whispers are excellent speakers and DUP has been able to match his electronics to make them sing.

"Based on what we heard at the dealer, Stew expects the Whispers to sound like his Nova Utopia's do in his room."

So why change speakers?

Quote:
I think where the whole argument centers around is the fact that DUP customizes the sound of his system to his liking and then proclaims that he's an objectivist.

That's not the whole argument. A large portion of the argument is that dup has no "criteria" for what sounds real (sounds floating overhead, poor driver integration, lack of a coherent soundstage) other than what he likes after EQ has further altered what's on the source material.

What did dup think of the sound after you disabled his beloved EQ? Something in the back of my mind says he thought you ruined his system.

His "criteria" is very limited - or else we would have heard about something other than just "SLAM!" for the past how many posts - and yet he insists it's the only criteria that matters. He then disparages anything that doesn't attempt to duplicate his modified reinforcement system sound quality and denigrates anyone who wishes to do no damage to the presentation placed on the source. His limited range of musical styles (he is the audio equivalent of a color blind individual who has never known the experience of "red" but wants to describe it to everyone else and insists he is the only one who could possibly be correct) means he doesn't understand the Holt quotation and can't bear to think there might be another way to approach sound reproduction - the original sound of acoustic instruments played without amplification as they exist in a real space- as a reference for what sounds "live".

dup's tactic is to use a sledgehammer where none is required and then repeatedly take that sledgehammer to anyone who disagrees with his approach. That he finds solace in opinions which confirm his own bizzare rationalizations while dismissing the mulitude of opinions which disaffirm anything he believes places him solidly in the "bigot" encampment. His troll-like acts of spam bludgeoning with those opinions, which we neither seek not agree with, is boring and tiresome. Most of us are well aware of the "facts" dup finds and we have filed them away with all of the other information which in total forms our opinions about how to recreate music in our homes. The difference being the rest of us take into account information which sometimes disagres with our established opinions. The fact that dup cannot grasp what is actually being said by experts with a better command of the situation than he possesses only makes for the embarrassing instances such as the "Elliot incident" of a few months back where dup truly made a fool of himself. And yet even when faced with contrary evidence - which he quoted, it didn't slow dup down one tiny bit and within the day he was back at it with more inane quotes and links.

That, IMO, summarizes 90% of the "problem".

Now, here's what I would like to see dup address without his usual antics.

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

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.

Quote:
"Based on what we heard at the dealer, Stew expects the Whispers to sound like his Nova Utopia's do in his room."

So why change speakers?

Because the Whispers are a lot cheaper. So, if he can have a speaker that sounds at least as good as what he has now for thousands less, then that's worth doing.

Jan,

I don't agree with DUP on everything. Yet, he never slams or brow beats me. Perhaps it's honor among thieves or perhaps it's just respect.

Quote:

Quote:
"Based on what we heard at the dealer, Stew expects the Whispers to sound like his Nova Utopia's do in his room."

So why change speakers?

Because the Whispers are a lot cheaper. So, if he can have a speaker that sounds at least as good as what he has now for thousands less, then that's worth doing.

Jan,

I don't agree with DUP on everything. Yet, he never slams or brow beats me. Perhaps it's honor among thieves or perhaps it's just respect.

So, Stew has these speakers, and he's 'trading down' because he expects both speakers to sound the same in his room.

Maybe Stew could audition speakers that would be cheaper still, and they could equally underperform in his room, and save him even more!

Is he selling the Utopias then? And this will be for reasons of fiscal gain, all in all?

For fun, see if DUP would let you audition Stew's speakers at DUP's house, and do the ultimate comparison!

Man, I feel kinda bad for Stew. I wonder what he'd think of the Utopias in a better room.

He may be tossing away a great bird in hand, so to speak!

Stew!

Fix the room first!

Quote:

So, Stew has these speakers, and he's 'trading down' because he expects both speakers to sound the same in his room.

Maybe Stew could audition speakers that would be cheaper still, and they could equally underperform in his room, and save him even more!

I don't agree with your assessment of "trading down". Whispers sounded better at DUP's than the Nova Utopia's did anywhere including the dealer.

Whispers sounded at the Legacy dealer as good as Stew's Nova Utopias sound in his room. The only other speaker we heard that sounded comparable to the Utopias were the Sonus Faber Stradivari. Alas, they are the same price as the Utopias, so it's not worth a trade.

Quote:

Is he selling the Utopias then? And this will be for reasons of fiscal gain, all in all?

Yes, he's selling Utopias. This will be for fiscal gain at worst and better sound and fiscal gain at best.

Quote:

For fun, see if DUP would let you audition Stew's speakers at DUP's house, and do the ultimate comparison!

I'm sure DUP wouldn't mind, but I'm not going to lug Utopias all the way to DUP's house for shits and giggles. They're over 200lbs a piece.

Quote:
Man, I feel kinda bad for Stew. I wonder what he'd think of the Utopias in a better room.

Both he and I have heard Utopias in a better room. Utopias have never sounded quite as good as the Whispers, albeit the difference isn't huge, but substantial none the less.

Quote:
He may be tossing away a great bird in hand, so to speak!

Stew!

Fix the room first!

Whereas Stew's room could definitely use some tweaking, he knows exactly what he has and what he can get. He didn't make this decision lightly. I don't think there's any reason to feel bad for Stew.

What is he asking for the Utopias?

Quote:
What is he asking for the Utopias?

You move FAST, Elk!

21k

Quote:

I don't agree with DUP on everything. Yet, he never slams or brow beats me. Perhaps it's honor among thieves or perhaps it's just respect.

You're big on that honor among theives, aren't you, Alex?

It's probably one of those two.

Let's see, how many people does dup respect?

OK, that takes care of that.

Quote:
21k

This seems pretty reasonable. I hope he gets it and that the transaction works out so that he is both pleased and has some extra money in pocket.

Quote:
A LIVE acoutic event is way to random to be any kind of "reference".

How am I supposed to make sense out of this drivel?

Quote:
So when you claim this or that sounds not like a live event, compared to what, you are just listening to someone eles' interpertaiton of something that happened, in different temps, humidity, barometric pressure, whcih all change teh SOUNd of instruments, since WOOD breathes, WOOD is ALIVE, so the LIVE event, is being now played back on electrical equipment, in DIFFERENT atmospheric conditions, trying to get a signal to your infected, dirty, mishapen ears, under entirely different enviromental conditions.

So, we're down to holding the barometric pressure responsible for lack of a reference. dup, they hold concerts in the Southern Hemisphere. The piano would be upside down, dup.

Quote:
According to all those posts, nothing can then ever be used as a comparison to LIVE.. Since teh only way you hear anything at home is a recorded representation, based on teh guy who recorded it's idea of what he thinks he heard live as he monitors it, through headphones, tweaks and turns lotsa knobs and buttons, to control the ELECTRICAL signal being stored on an electrical device.

I believe that is the most nonsensical thing you've ever posted.

Quote:
So any evaluation of anything used to REPRODUCE the previous live event which was trying to be saved on an electricla device is meaningless, since you are using a COPY of whatever live event you recorded, then play it back through more electronics, and now you are gonna decide that the SPEAKERS don't sound like the live acoustic instruments, that you are trying to recall from memory (audio memory is SHORT, those anti double blind test nudnicks claim).

But I would be wrong since this far exceeds the previous ... uh ... "statement" (that's far too kind) in its idiocy. The "previous" live event "which was trying to be saved on an electricla device is meaningless"? It was trying to be saved? What? Was it wearing a tiny little set of electricla water wings? Oh, brother!

dup, I wanted you to respond to this,

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

You didn't even come close to responding to the basic idea Holt presents. If you can post anything that can actually be understood to the point of discussion, we'll get to live acoustic events. Don't even go there now, dup. Just work your little brain on the statement in quotations. Read the qualifiers I posted on the last page and respond to those items.

C'mon, dup, let's not embarrass yourself again. Bottom line it, dup, how does an instrument with hundreds of possible sounds become a "reference"?

Psst, it doesn't have anything to do with acoustic instruments. Just concentrate, dup. You must have some answer that can be placed into a coherent sentence.

And stop being the bigot you've proven yourself to be. It's the 21st century, dup. Wake up!

Does anyone out there have any idea what dup is trying to say? Anyone agree? Anyone?

OK! J Gordon Holt quotes!

Here's one:

"...high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me, because I am associated by so many people with the mess my disciples made of spreading my gospel."

So, what now?

I agree with JGH about the amplified music quote, but not the double blind quote.

Are there any JGH desciples who follow the complete gosepl according to Gordon?

Quote:
Are there any JGH disciples who follow the complete gospel according to Gordon?

Not many, I wager.

On the subject of blind testing, I think there should be a blind test of power sources. Can one hear the difference if the electricity was generated by geothermal, hydro, or wind, or coal or nuclear?

I can imagine it now ". . . wind generated electricity has lends an open, airy sound; it's as if a window has been thrown open . . ."

Wow. You go fishing for a couple days, and you lose the entire thread. Stew. Who is Stew? He owns Utopias. Who says they're any good? Maybe Stewww should post a revewww, detailing his transcendental conversion from one overpriced clunk to another.

Hey. I think Alex and Stew should buy Whispers. If that is what they like, then that is what they like. Take the Utopias back to the dystopia that spawned them. And DUP should strap 'em in with 40 yards of Rat Shack's best, with Van Alstine's best octuple-amp designs (4-way X 2, right?). He must be lickin' his chops!

And who cares what live music sounds like? Who should care?

Ya pays yer money, ya takes yer cherce.

Now, can we stop arguing abstracts? The only thing I can say, is that I have heard both the Legacy Whisper models and the Nova Utopias. With the Whispers, you get screwed for less money. But you are screwed only if you want to get as close as possible to live acoustic music. Otherwise, buy whatever turns you on.

If you are going to argue, argue from a common basis. You all know what mine is. Other than that, I couldn't give a tinker's tam-tam what Stew needs to float his boat. Whoever he is.

As usual you have no answer just detritus you've stuffed in your skull to make it rattle when you turn up the Legacy's.

There's no point. You don't belong here, dup.

Quote:
You don't belong here, dup.

His Royal Majesty has spoken! Begone, ye sinful DUP! Pack your heretical views, ideas and speakers and leave these righteous forums for those who refuse to be corrupted by your foul drivel! It's too late to repent! You have poisoned the holy waters of the Stereophile forums and ye shall thank the benevolence of His Majesty for banishment as your mere punishment, for in the eyes of the righteous, death is a more befitting sentence for your crimes!

Quote:
I will not use the Jan only counter or toilet.

DUP, the mens room is nextdoor.

RG

Quote:

Quote:
I will not use the Jan only counter or toilet.

DUP, the mens room is nextdoor.

RG

Did you mean the "Forum Announcements," or "The Entry Level?"

Hahahahahahahaha.

Watch out, I'm wearing my Beavis and Butthead tie today!

Quote:
... you shouldn't waste our time by being here.

Gee, Alex, I know you don't want to come across as a dup sycophant but you didn't give mrlowry a hard time when he said the same thing. Maybe it's that honor among thieves thing you refer to that keeps you from doing so, though I have no proof mrlowry is a thief. Once again, what have you heard?

dup gets to be here on the forum, there's no doubt about that. dup doesn't belong in a discussion in which he can't hold up his end of the conversation. How many times has he been asked the same question? How many times has he avoided anything that resembles an answer to that question? You really don't think what he's posted is an answer to any question, do you, Alex? dup's not willing to participate in this discussion or most discussions for that matter. If he were, then he should answer the question posed to him on numerous occasions. If he won't, then he has no place on this thread even if he does get to post his drivel on the forum.

Exactly! That's what I say: Answer the question, DUP! Stand before judgment and answer the questions posed before thee! Don't cover before the shining, bright light of justice! Answer the question before the magistrate! Face the circle of judgment!

Quote:

Gee, Alex, I know you don't want to come across as a dup sycophant but you didn't give mrlowry a hard time when he said the same thing. Maybe it's that honor among thieves thing you refer to that keeps you from doing so, though I have no proof mrlowry is a thief. Once again, what have you heard?

Que?

We're trying to determine why Alex made a big deal about my statement to dup and not yours. One possibility is you are a thief and Alex believes in honor among thieves as he stated here;

Quote:
Jan,

I don't agree with DUP on everything. Yet, he never slams or brow beats me. Perhaps it's honor among thieves or perhaps it's just respect.

We've more or less ruled out the "respect" option and that leaves the alternative. Where does that put you?

Quote:
We're trying to determine why Alex made a big deal about my statement to dup and not yours. One possibility is you are a thief and Alex believes in honor among thieves as he stated here;

Quote:
Jan,

I don't agree with DUP on everything. Yet, he never slams or brow beats me. Perhaps it's honor among thieves or perhaps it's just respect.

We've more or less ruled out the "respect" option and that leaves the alternative. Where does that put you?

I'd say it's because although he and I have disagreed (here for example) a couple of times, we've always kept it civil. Where as he "feels" that you've brow beat him. Either that or he just didn't notice when I said it.

But he doesn't mind dup brow beating everyone?!

I'd say at least 50% of this forum is someone brow beating someone else. If it weren't, there would be a lot of good people who still particpiated in this forum.

I agree! Let's restrict Jan to the January 2008 forums.

To be funny that would have to make sense.

Do you feel like you been brow beat, Alex? By me? But not dup? Is that it? You're carrying a grudge?

That's quite immature.

Look at it this way, during the next pub crawl you get to be the designated shoplifter.