Quote:
j_j
[Re: Jan Vigne] #66800 - 05/03/09 11:32 PM

Apparently you, since I said no such thing, and you came fuming out, getting on your donkey to tilt at the windmill of jj, only to find out it was a full-fledged castle with people manning the battlements.

I REQUIRE a complete, grovelling, abject apology from you for all of this ludicrous harrassment. Until I receive it, I shall treat you like a deliberate, malicious, and thoroughly dishonest troll.

You have not addressed a word I said. You have LIED about my position (by insinuation, yes, but that's still a lie), you have attacked your own words as paraphased by me (yes, I did that quite on purpose) and you have continued to attack, attack, attack even though you had no gripe except the imaginary one flying around your bonnet, looking for a nice flower to fertilize.

I think we need a good dose of troll-begone.

ETA: Oh, and if you bothered to read the OP, rather than go off into outer space, you'd have noticed the "low order distortion" issue addressed, not directly, but implicitly to an extent that required that it be so.

Pay attention, jj. Remember this post from over three weeks ago?

Quote:
Jan Vigne
Re: Oh, The Utter Dishonesty of being unable to read before you open your mouth [Re: j_j]
#65472 - 04/17/09 08:35 AM

My word! How you do get yourself worked up into a lather over things you do not understand. About things you could easily understand but choose not to.

WTF is wrong with you?!!!

You arrrived here just the other day and now you've jumped in my shit twice over things you truly haven't taken the time to understand. You don't read anything other than one post and then you respond with a pissed off attitude that really stinks. And this time you've got me really pissed off over your attitude!

And I'm very tired of your bullshit!

I don't care if you are a friend of John's, Obama's or the Queen's. I don't care if you designed the wires in the f'ing Space Shuttle. I don't care who you are, what hills you crawled out of or what you've done since that time. What you have proven you cannot do is f'ing read the thread before you open your mouth!

You need to read something for comprehension - what comes before and what comes after - before you start screaming about how unfair and biased I am. Your little tirades about how wrong I am, how stupid I am, have, in two trys, gone over the limit.

READ!!!!!!!! Read the GD thread before you unhinge your brain and start to type. Know what the hell you're talking about before you accuse someone of anything!

I'm not going to explain my post to you. If you want to know how far off course you are with your petty little comments, then go back and read the entire thread instead of the bits and pieces you then react to. Or is it that you really don't care what someone else has to say and you only read to find something to misinterpret and then go over the top about? What I posted had nothing to do with the cost of a product relative to its sound quality. If you had read the post I responded to, you would know that. But you didn't read. And you didn't read John's response either, did you? It was easier to just scream about something that doesn't exist, isn't it! You need to read!

BUUUUUT, NOOOOOOOOOO! You little jackbooted ass, you had to run off some knee jerk insult without knowing the facts. This is the second time you've done this to me since you arrived here the other day. I'm already quite tired of your inability to read before you open your mouth. I am trying my best to enjoy myself on this forum and you are making this very, very difficult with your insulting posts that constantly attack me for something I've never once said.

Go back and read the thread. Then I expect an apology from you.

And, if you read enough of the post you quoted, why aren't you unhinged about Ethan's insults to my system? Ethan has insulted my system on at least a half dozen occasions, without call and without knowing what components I own and without ever hearing my systsem. That's OK with you? You have no problem with Winer being a jerk, eh? But you'll jump me for something I never said? Is that it? Yeah, you didn't see those posts but then you didn't see what I posted before you jumped me either! Just who the hell are you anyway? Winer's momma?

Why aren't you upset that Ethan peered into my property? You'd enjoy having someone on an audio forum do that to you maybe? How about the outright lies Winer posted about me with the only intention being to directly insult me? Those are OK with you too? You don't mind those? Is that it?

You bitch and moan about attacks that never occured but you're OK with those that did!

Why the hell aren't you paying attention?

What exactly is wrong with you, you little weasel?

To which you quickly tucked your tail between your legs and ran away.

I was there first, jj. I'm still waiting for my apology that I assume you are not man enough to provide. So, once you get up the gumption to apologize to me for how you've acted I'll consider what to give you in return. But don't expect an apology, I don't apologize to trolls.

Your posts "implied" this and "insinutated" that. All the while your posts had nothing to do with anything I was saying. That's your game, isn't it? Try to get the other person flustered by your distortions and utter disregard for what they want to say and the points they want to make. You're a bit too obvious, jj, I suspect you're well off your game at this advanced stage of life.

Quote:
I really don't give a crap who jj "is". I know what both of you are and we don't need any more of it on this forum.

jj, you are a f'ing troll. You came here looking for fights and tossing in "anthropomorphism" and "homomorphism" and bullshit as deep as it comes.

I'm not interested. I came to this forum and this thread to discuss audio.

You never had that in mind and were only tossing out bait to see who might buy your line.

This apology crap is just that, your bullshit game. I dropped out a while back and forced you to actually say something about SET's to get someone to pay attention to you and now you figure you're back where you want to be - trolling another forum with faux outrage.

You and Xeno are rather disgusting figures for what should be grown men. You've been told to STFU, jj. I second that until you are interested in discussing audio in a civilzed manner, which we know isn't what you intend to do on this forum. You're all about the provocation, prevarication and then the ultimate call of "LIAR" and a demand for an apology from the troll you've discovered.

I know that's what you do, anyone could tell that by your third post on this forum. You would prefer to turn this thread into another 40 pages of personal insults. What a game you play for a grown man! Not that I haven't seen this before. What is it with you old retired farts that this is the best thing you can do with your time?

Go away, jj, you are wasting everyone's time. I'm simply not going to go on for another thirty five pages of personal insults. I would hope no one else would give you that pleasure and that Stephen would quickly close down this thread if it even began to head in that direction thanks to you and Xeno.

I have nothing more to say to you. You took my bait (rather quickly too I might add) and then showed what "fine fellows" you and your puppy really are.

I've proven all the points I care to on this thread. The bottom feeders have swallowed the worm. Now, jj, it's time for a "fine fellow" like you to admit to being a troll (and not a very good one at that!) and then STFU and hopefully go away.

John, as I said, if either of these two happen to be someone you call a friend, sorry, but this is bullshit.

Quote:
You mean, in audio, it could sound good, but be bad?

Wouldn't Duke, when he spoke of how something sounded, by definition be talking about how something sounded? Which can only be determined by, what, listening and what else?

Depends what you mean by 'good' or 'bad'. I take "Duke" to mean good as it sounds good, or 'got that swing' when he makes music. Now that you mention that way, I see that the phrase may be applicable for listening to music too.

I feel the same way when things go right on a performance. Everything clicks and sounds 'good'. The performer(s) and the audience is positively moved. It's got that 'swing'.

In audio reproduction, if it sounds good it may be very enjoyable, although it may not necessarily be accurate. That's different than saying if it 'sounds good' it is 'bad'. If one wants accuracy, then 'sounds good and not accurate' is not as good as 'sounds good and is accurate'. The latter is what I would like to achieve in my audio reproduction.

Quote:
Maybe you are referencing the enemy of good in audio...."better?" It may sound good, but it could be better?

I suppose that comes close to what I would like and try to say (you said it 'better' ), although I'm not sure I would refer to it as an enemy, if I have not misunderstood you. We all want 'better', no question about that. I just think it should be doing that sounding better while being accurate in reproduction as well.

Thanks for your thoughts.

This is a difficult thread, fraught with danger...

I send my message in peace and good fellowship.

I think we speakie the same language.

Joy, first, then accurate joy.

Quote:
Well, if he's cross forum bashing we should bring that to the attention of the admin. JJ, I hope you are not posting links on your other site to threads on this site just to start trouble. That would be a big no-no.

"Cross-forum bashing"? What do you know, there's a term for it. You're absolutely right, you know. However, although the players in this recent "DBTologist invasion" are or were from AVS Forum, it wasn't originating from there, but from their other DBT church where they pray to the comparator box, the "Hydrogen Audio forum". Guess what the title of the thread is over there, where they've been bashing us? Yup, "The Dishonesty of Sighted Listening Tests". Guess who shows up in it? Yup. Sean Olive. Guess what else? That joker has been posting here under a pseudonym ("Tonmeister2008"). You know, the very thing that makes the joker posting under the pseudonym "jj" cry to the gills with more indignant outrage, as he attacks anyone here he perceives as posting under an alias. In that thread, Sean Olive admits that what these DBTologists were doing was trying to "convert" (his word) us "faith-based audiophiles" (his term for audiophiles who don't buy into the pseudoscience of audio-based DBTs**) on Stereophile. Just like I said they were doing, -before- I had even read any of that. (**I guess that's a cut above "audiophools", which another member calls us in that thread, or "voodoo reviewers", which they call Stereophile reviewers).

The Stereophile DBT dogma thread entitled "The Dishonesty of Sighted Listening Tests" was started by Ethan, as a promise to Sean Olive, to post his DBT blog rhetoric on Stereophile, in the hopes of adding new converts to their DBT cult. Ethan then alerted his Hydrogen buddy Axon to come and do battle with the unbelievers in his newly created DBT "education thread" on Stereophile. Axon then started the cross-forum DBT bashing, and provided Hydrogen with a regular report on his Stereophile activities. Here are some of the highlights of that cross-forum bashing thread that newly-minted Stereophile "members" from Hydrogen Audio are featured in:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=71121&hl=stereophile

Axon wrote:

FWIW, there's a truly incredible thread playing out on Stereophile over this; I feel the need to provide some muscle for Sean (who is rather crazily entering that hornet's nest). Note, this is not the place for calm, evenhanded, or respectful discussion. It is in fact about 1 or 2 steps removed from RAO.

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showfla...age=0#Post64883

There's no use for a carebears mode with posts like this:

QUOTE
So my hearing is better than the advocates of the DBT, who have no idea what they are taking about.

QUOTE
Olive's useless time-wasting, money-gobbing tests only prove that double blind tests disorient the listener, and are an unreliable means of testing audio gear.

Remember folks, "Axon" is the "muscle" for Sean Olive. Because Sean is too feeble to handle DBT debates on his own. Makes sense, I guess. Even the Scientologists, which the audio "DBTologists" have based their cult on, have their "crew" at the bottom of the totem pole, who does all the 'dirty work' that needs doin'. I note, Axon wastes no time quoting me to his DBT true believers at Hydrogen. Should I be flattered?!

Axon wrote:

True, but the lurkers only leave insofar as controversy and/or ignorance is exposed. I suspect the main posters there have a substantial amount of influence on lurkers who otherwise are not aware of the DBT debate.

This pretty much confirms that Axon and the rest of the Hydrogen boys (including Ethan, let's not forget), started or furthered the DBT thread "The Dishonesty of Sighted Listening Tests" with the intention of converting lurkers to their audio DBT religion, who would otherwise "not be aware of the DBT debate". Which is something I have always known and stated, now being confirmed.

Krabapple wrote:

KBK and Fremer are despicable examples of the anti-science audiophile mindset.

Note the word "despicable". The above pretty much says all we need to know about one of Stereophile forum's newest members, Mr. or Mrs. "Krabapple". Who has 1,150 posts on Hydrogen and a whopping 21 on Stereophile.

Axon wrote:

Nah, Michigan J Frog isn't Mikey - unless he has sockpuppets?

Oh goody, they're talking about me again. Conjecturing upon which one of the anti-pseudoscience audiophiles they hate most, that they are mistaking me for. Apparently, they don't all agree on their wild speculations.

krabapple wrote:

I wasn't confusing the two -- or referring directly to your two posted quotes -- but I'm happy to add MJF, geoffkait, jvigne, and atkinson to that shortlist. And now the ones accusing Olive of having a commercial agenda.

And now they (Krabapple) put me on a "shortlist" with Geoff Kait, Jan Vigne and John Atkinson. How can I -not- be flattered by that?!

HotshotGG wrote:

Why even bother with them? Why not just boycott the website? You know for a fact they are never going to except DBT due to their ignorance and the fact that they are trying to sell products. Why would they listen to the scientific community? It's like getting into a political discussion with you best friend who vehemently disagree with you. While in one senese it's fun to yell at them for being so naive in close minded in another sense you aren't going to change their world view. It's the same thing with DBT's in my opinion. Either they don't know how to conduct them and arn't willing to or are never going to accept them.

"Boycott the (Stereophile) website"?? How? By NOT appearing on it? Wow, what a concept. Does that mean the 50 billion people not registered with Stereophile's forum are "boycotting" it? This from the "hotshot" who writes "you know for a fact they are never going to except DBT due to their ignorance". Again, that confirms what his DBT cult buddies are really doing on Stereophile. Because.... "it's fun to yell at us for being so naive in close minded". Uh-uh. (insert rollingeyes emoticon).

Axon wrote:

I admit, part of it is exasperation on my part at Sean even bothering to post there. Had he not been there and it just was Ethan vs the turks, well, it wouldn't be the first time I avoided a DBT flamewar on Stereophile. But I couldn't just stand there and watch him get flamed to pieces out there by himself. He might get old and cranky and turn into jj or Arny before our very eyes.

Here Axon admits he loves him a good "DBT flamewar" on Stereophile. Mmmm-mm.

Axon wrote:
QUOTE
QUOTE
Olive's useless time-wasting, money-gobbing tests only prove that double blind tests disorient the listener, and are an unreliable means of testing audio gear.That's sacrilegious. I can't think of a good analogy, but that's like saying Richard Dawkins doesn't understand anything about Evolutionary Biology.Right. That said, I'm pretty proud of my reply...

Axon tells his DBT choirboys he's "proud of his reply" to me. Oh whoopie! All is good in DBT church today! Axon gets a holy wafer for his cross-forum bashing efforts. I know you,re reading this, Ason, so let me tell you something you didn't know about me: I'm also a member of the Richard Dawkins forum. I argue against the flying spaghetti monster because I don't buy into faith-based beliefs: like your silly audio DBT's. Here's another twist of irony: I happen to know at least one of you DBT nutters -are- practicing Xtians. I'm consistent with my beliefs, while you DBT doctrinaires contradict yourselves happily and freely.

Woodinville (aka "jj", yes THAT jj. You know the one who wrote to me on Stereophile: "You're still just a coward who hides behind a cartoon pseudonym in order to avoid having your words actually affect your (lack of?) reputation in a bad way." ) wrote:

Well, I wandered over there and gave you all the support I could muster without suggesting that they were first cousins to creationists.

I was as polite as I could manage given the heights of arrogance and depths of hatred of science that simply floated away from the thread.

So now we learn that "Woodinville", aka "jj", who goes on Stereophile to yell at people for using pseudonyms (whether they are or are not!) like he does on Hydrogen, came here to "support" brother Axon, his DBT disciple. And indeed the chronology of "Woddinville's" appearance here confirms that. At least he did all he could to prevent himself from calling Stereophile members "cousins of creationists"

Woodinville (aka "jj") wrote:

Check out Jan Vigne's latest (as of now) response to me at the stereophile forum. I begin to suspect that the gentleman is disturbed. I urge you NOT to reply there.

Given the kind of mongoloid rants that this "jj" troll has always been known for (Stereophile members only got a taste of it in recent days), I can't imagine what kind of warped definition he is using for the term 'disturbed'.

Honestguv wrote:

How much are luxury products about technical performance and how much are they about perceived performance (e.g. status). How a professional in a lab or studio judges the abilities of hardware is substantially different to how the audiophiles on Stereophile's forum judge the abilities of hardware. The latter may well believe a lot of nonsense about how the world around them works but it is a valid part of how they judge.

Is it morally wrong to give people what they want? The posters on Stereophile's forum want audio equipment to be magical and will work hard to push away and ignore information that goes against this.

So according to this clown, Stereophile members "believe a lot of nonsense about how the world around them works". While audio DBT cult members on HA or AVSF simply believe that James Randi knows more about audio than anyone here. We want our equipment to be "magical". While Hydrogen members just want it to be "cheap".

Gorgekko wrote:

The last thing we need to be are the Richard Dawkinses of DBT.

That said, anyone who jumps into that discussion deserves a medal.

And with that last witnessing, brothers Axon, Ethan, Xenophanes, Steven Sullivan, Krabapple, ArnyK, Tonmeister2008 who all "jumped into that discussion"... please come and collect your medals. They are located in the Stereophile trash compactor, because we could not find any suitable place to store them. Just sift around for them among the refuse. Don't be afraid of any sudden loud noises, those are just the hydraulics activating. Which they do regularly.

How can I omit including a quote from their exalted leader of the DBT cult, Sean Olive, he of "no agenda" (snicker), who writes of his agenda:

SOlive wrote:

I would like to see a future where consumers are provided standardized perceptually meaningful audio specifications that allow them to quickly determine whether product A sounds better than product B based on a set of sound quality attributes. This would allow the consumer to free themselves from reliance on unsubstantiated manufacturers'/audio reviewers' claims based on uncontrolled, biased sighted listening.

The man is Hill-arious, with a capital "H" and two L's! Doing your thinking for you apparently isn't enough for Sean. His plans for world DBT domination also happen to include doing your listening for you!

In Sean Olive's view of the (future) world, we will all be consulting "specifications" (non-specified) which tell us all we need to know about which audio component sounds better. Based on the idea of what an AES audio-DBT researcher (all of whom are old, cranky and can't hear worth a damn...) tells us are the only "sound quality attributes" that matter. Sean tells us this would "free us from "reliance on unsubstantiated manufacturers'/audio reviewers' claims" because according to Sean, we can't trust them, and we can't trust our own ears! We can ONLY trust what pseudoscientific quack audio researchers tell us about audio DBT's.

Well Sean, what can I say? Dreams are always free! So please, DREAM ON! When you die, you'll go to DBT heaven, I'm sure. But only if you can pass 3 rounds of tests, with a 23 out of 25 positive id...

Those are examples of cross-forum bashing. It has gotten so bad on the Internet that it is practically a banning offense on almost any forum.

Quote:
And with that last witnessing, brothers Axon, Ethan, Xenophanes, Steven Sullivan, Krabapple, ArnyK, Tonmeister2008 who all "jumped into that discussion"... please come and collect your medals. They are located in the Stereophile trash compactor, because we could not find any suitable place to store them.

Lamont Sanford - Go back to the junk yard!
Let the man have his thread here!

Jan demonstrates his ignorance once again here in this thread, in more ways than one. Ignorance is bliss for him it seems.

I don't seem to recall these kinds of debates in the car hobby.

Do people insist cars be marketed or sold in a similar fashion?

People venerate 1964 Ferraris, but not, it seems, 1964 McIntosh!

Boy, I can hardly wait for the day Sean's spec sheet becomes law.

Quote:
Those are examples of cross-forum bashing. It has gotten so bad on the Internet that it is practically a banning offense on almost any forum.

...As well it should be. This was clearly an orchestrated assault on the Stereophile forum, against its members, from members of the Hydrogen Audio forum. The question is, is it a banning offense on -this- forum?

I could not find any TOS info on that.

Quote:

Quote:
Those are examples of cross-forum bashing. It has gotten so bad on the Internet that it is practically a banning offense on almost any forum.

...As well it should be. This was clearly an orchestrated assault on the Stereophile forum, against its members, from members of the Hydrogen Audio forum. The question is, is it a banning offense on -this- forum?

I could not find any TOS info on that.

I can't keep up with this cross-forum drama, but I can say that I don't feel assaulted and I am not convinced there were any sinister plots laid by the original post. Whatever the case may be, I think we should give people the benefit of the doubt before dropping our nuclear bombs.

As usual, there is some interesting content in this thread, if we can see beyond the anger and downright weirdness. So, I'll keep the thread open for awhile longer unless I see that we can't move on in a productive and respectful manner.

Quote:
Frog's dragging of other people (guilt by association, anyone?) into the debate from other forums shows just the level of absolutely dishonest hatred and prejudice that some people have for science and for what it teaches, I think.

Go back to the hole you came from. Your little game is exposed. Troll.

Admin,

Would you tolerate us posting links to another forum's threads so we as a group can go over there and start a scrap? As far as I'm concerned you wouldn't. There is no benefit of doubt in this situation. These losers are coming over here and going back to their little lair to mock us. And to add insult to injury we have Ethan right in the middle.

Quote:
Admin,
Would you tolerate us posting links to another forum's threads so we as a group can go over there and start a scrap? As far as I'm concerned you wouldn't.

It wouldn't even occur to me because it's pretty fucking silly and childish. What is this? West Side Story? The Outsiders?

Boyz n the Hood?

Quote:
These losers are coming over here and going back to their little lair to mock us. And to add insult to injury we have Ethan right in the middle.

I'll look into it. However, whatever is said on the internet is up for discussion and judgment, so why don't we all be a little more careful about what we say? If you suspect someone of being a troll, please don't reply to him.

Quote:
It wouldn't even occur to me because it's pretty fucking silly and childish. What is this? West Side Story? The Outsiders?

The Jets are gonna have their way tonight. Stay gold, Pony Boy!

I think the only person guilty of dragging another forum into this is me. And I only slightly regret it.

I'll repeat what I said earlier to Frog: it would have never occurred to me to post that if the tone here wasn't so vulgar to begin with. I can discuss stuff rationally on my own without calling for backup - but what I saw being discussed here was simply more emotional than rational.

I mean, if y'all weren't looking for a fight in the first place, what exactly were you doing posting there? It seemed like every other sentence from some posters was an insult. What about my behavior is so offensive when all of you are already fighting to be king of Sh*t Mountain?

This isn't your forum. It's just as much mine, or any other poster who arrived like jj or krabapple, as it is yours. (I'm speaking to posters besides Steven here, of course, and besides those who really do violate the rules.)

That said, I like to think I made an attempt at rational discussion there, and on HA in more recent posts. I freely admit that the tone of a lot of posters there is quite irrationally dogmatic. I prefer to be rationally dogmatic.

I probably wouldn't repeat this cross-forum behavior in the future, but purely on pragmatic grounds. The amorality of such an action confounds me.

I'm sensing a little ego defense here along with a little damage control. It's a start...slightly. You know us Jets will destroy you Sharks.

A few corrections.

Quote:
The Stereophile DBT dogma thread entitled "The Dishonesty of Sighted Listening Tests" was started by Ethan, as a promise to Sean Olive, to post his DBT blog rhetoric on Stereophile, in the hopes of adding new converts to their DBT cult. Ethan then alerted his Hydrogen buddy Axon to come and do battle with the unbelievers in his newly created DBT "education thread" on Stereophile.

Not true; I found this thread entirely on my own. I've never actually talked to Ethan through private messaging, actually. All the posts I've made here encompass all the contact I've had with him, ever. I'm not even sure he has an HA account.

Quote:
Axon then started the cross-forum DBT bashing, and provided Hydrogen with a regular report on his Stereophile activities.

Guilty as charged on the first count! <salute>

But "regular report"? Um, no. Three offhand followups on the original topic does not a "regular report" make.

Quote:
Remember folks, "Axon" is the "muscle" for Sean Olive. Because Sean is too feeble to handle DBT debates on his own.

Well, as I later discovered (in that thread you helpfully linked to), I was expecting a level of non-curmudgeonliness in Sean that of course did not exist. Had I known he was as curmudgeonly as say jj, I wouldn't have bothered.

I'm not sure I would have called that thread a "DBT debate" more than I would call it a flamewar. Flamewars are won by whoever has the most gasoline.

Quote:
This pretty much confirms that Axon and the rest of the Hydrogen boys (including Ethan, let's not forget),

Again, do you have any evidence that Ethan posts at HA?

Quote:
started or furthered the DBT thread "The Dishonesty of Sighted Listening Tests" with the intention of converting lurkers to their audio DBT religion, who would otherwise "not be aware of the DBT debate". Which is something I have always known and stated, now being confirmed.

And this is wrong... how?

I like to think I avoid threads where I have nothing to say or my posts would do nothing productive. Believe me, if I was actively proselytizing, I'd be a far, far more voluminous poster. Like, say, DUP.

But when you get down to it, I think not enough people understand the issues involved in this debate, I think I'm on the right side in this debate - more right than many HA posters, in fact - and I enjoy sharing my side. Perfectly selfish and perfectly OK.

Quote:
Oh goody, they're talking about me again. Conjecturing upon which one of the anti-pseudoscience audiophiles they hate most, that they are mistaking me for. Apparently, they don't all agree on their wild speculations.

Doesn't that disagreement sort of tear a hole in your idea of HydrogenAudio being a kind of cult?

There is a lot of disagreement voiced in that thread - you're just cherrypicking the most insulting bits to people on this forum. Rather poorly I might add.

Quote:
Here Axon admits he loves him a good "DBT flamewar" on Stereophile. Mmmm-mm.

Actually, it tasted "a bit nutty". Probably not my "cup of coffee", I must admit.

Quote:
Axon tells his DBT choirboys he's "proud of his reply" to me. Oh whoopie! All is good in DBT church today! Axon gets a holy wafer for his cross-forum bashing efforts. I know you,re reading this, Ason, so let me tell you something you didn't know about me: I'm also a member of the Richard Dawkins forum. I argue against the flying spaghetti monster because I don't buy into faith-based beliefs: like your silly audio DBT's. Here's another twist of irony: I happen to know at least one of you DBT nutters -are- practicing Xtians. I'm consistent with my beliefs, while you DBT doctrinaires contradict yourselves happily and freely.

Ah, yes, consistency, what Emerson referred to as "the hobgoblin of little minds." Sorry, you walked right into that one.

Actually, I think the person who liked that reply the most was a friend who is a firm believer in astrology. And how exactly does pride and chuch go together? What does this have to do with anything, anyway? Bringing in one's religious beliefs is an ad hominem fallacy.

Anyways, the rest of your post speaks for itself, so I'm out.

Quote:
I'm sensing a little ego defense here along with a little damage control. It's a start...slightly. You know us Jets will destroy you Sharks.

Well, the post started off with "no regrets", but shocking though it is to see a pro-DBTer admit a mistake, it is not advisable to go long on RGRT as it is not likely to appreciate further.

Buh-bye...

You guys need a little muscle around here. Thank God I'm here now that Clifton and Elk have gone. R.I.P.

Quote:
I think the only person guilty of dragging another forum into this is me. And I only slightly regret it.

I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. I put Frog on my ignore list ages ago because most of his posts were just personal attacks. I had to temporarily remove him from my list to see what this latest brouhaha was all about - and that was only because I've been posting to the "Why We Need Audiophiles" thread over at HA.

Anyone who regularly posts personal attacks shouldn't be concerned about such attacks on them, regardless of the forum they're posted in. My take is that by feigning offense, he thought he could get someone who disagrees with his views banned. Given the double standard of banning vis-a-vis DUP, that's a rational expectation. But I think he overestimated the extent of the double standard.

To actually reply to the original topic....

jj, these simulations you speak of - where are they, and what levels of distortion are necessary to cause significant loudness changes? Is there a public loudness estimator yet that can do partial loudnesses, or am I really going to have to rewrite pfpf one of these days?

Would this same logic also apply for speakers with high levels of low order THD?

I thought you said you were out? And now your back. You can't be trusted. But thanks for the effort of trying to get this thread back on track even though it is a farce perpetuated elsewhere.

Quote:

Quote:
I think the only person guilty of dragging another forum into this is me. And I only slightly regret it.

I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. I put Frog on my ignore list ages ago because most of his posts were just personal attacks. I had to temporarily remove him from my list to see what this latest brouhaha was all about - and that was only because I've been posting to the "Why We Need Audiophiles" thread over at HA.

Oh! Totally forgot about ignoring him since the start of the Olive thread. Thanks, already done.

Quote:
Anyone who regularly posts personal attacks shouldn't be concerned about such attacks on them, regardless of the forum they're posted in. My take is that by feigning offense, he thought he could get someone who disagrees with his views banned. Given the double standard of banning vis-a-vis DUP, that's a rational expectation. But I think he overestimated the extent of the double standard.

An eminently sensible hypothesis. I'm not sure I agree, but I think my deduction of the situation makes less sense than yours!

Bah. Posting observations without testable samples or algorithms? Always so coy. ;P

Can the SET simulation be merely a static transfer curve for sufficient accuracy?

Given that we have discussed this sort of stuff before, is there anything you would add to that discussion specifically? Would you agree that this same loudness-modulating effect of distortion also explains some aspects of instrument design, and of mastering for low dynamic range environments?

Quote:
Would you agree that this same loudness-modulating effect of distortion also explains some aspects of instrument design, and of mastering for low dynamic range environments?

Quote:
And a big yes to the instrument questions.

Please explain this, jj. Instruments are meant to distort? Or instruments are meant to shape their own harmonic structure? All instruments are only certain instruments?

"jj" aka "Woodinville" wrote:

Quote:
What amazes me is that all I've done here is explain a mechanism by which some people might find they like SET's.

No, not quite. All you did was give your personal opinion of SET's, based on misunderstood and misapplied rules of audio engineering, arguing that people like SET's for all the wrong reasons. It's simply more anti-scientific propaganda from you, as we've come to expect. That's probably why you're getting such a negative reaction from your condescending, abusive and increasingly hateful posts. Well, that and the fact that you're a cross-forum bashing troll and as we've learned, have no business on a high end audiophile group, since your whole raison d'etre here is to make fun of "audiophools" as you call us, to your DBT parishoners on Hydrogen.

jj, like his DBT brothers, is not above calling people names, as we see:

Quote:
For some reason, this is "trolling" and Vigne and the chicken-**** hide-behind-a-pseudonym "Frog" see fit to engage in insanely inaccurate vilification.

Ok, now you have attacked me without provocation here, dragging my good name into an argument with someone else, and insulted generations of Frogs in the process. Not to mention using "chicken" as a pejorative, when I have many friends who are chickens. And let me say, any one of them could beat an aging wimp like you in a bare-knuckled fight, with one feather tied behind his beak. Speaking of "insanely inaccurate villification", you have yet to prove any of these vicious allegations that I am hiding behind a pseudonym. In fact, there are so many insane contradictions with your accusations, I have to start listing them:

1) You have numerous times now attacked my character and reputation by accusing me of hiding behind a "pseudonym", and I'm not even the only one you have done this with. "jj", if that is even your real name, I DEMAND that you -prove- this is true, or retract your statement and issue a formal apology. You are a troll from another forum coming here to bash us. You DO NOT make accusations against members of our forum that you provide no evidence to back up.

2) You are hiding behind a pseudonym yourself; "jj". And yet you attack others that you falsely accuse of "hiding behind pseudonyms"?? Hypocritical, much?

3) As I have recently shown in this thread, you are in your own words a "chicken-**** hiding-behind-the-pseudonym "Woodinville"" on another forum (not to mention the various pseudonyms and sockpuppet aliases you have been known to use over the years of engaging in your DBT wars on various internet audio forums).

4) I can't tell you how ironic it is to seriously whine and complain to someone using the name "Buddha", about someone else being chicken-*** because you think he's "hiding behind a pseudonym". But it doesn't even end there. For "Buddha" is another one of our members you complained about being "chicken-****" for "hiding behind a pseudonym".

For this personal character attack of attacking someone's name, as we have seen, has been your sole and primary response to anyone who counters your pseudoscientific hogwash with an argument you can't refute or back up. So take note, that I am officially slapping you in the face with my virtu-glove (reg. tm.). I DEMAND an abject, grovelling, on your knees with lots of weeping apology from you, when you fail to provide evidence of your accusation.

Quote:
Frog's dragging of other people (guilt by association, anyone?) into the debate from other forums

Er no, speaking of "insane villification" again "Woodinville", that's quite an insane accusation of you to make about me. I did not "drag" anyone from AVS Forum or Hydrogen Audio to come into this debate. They came of their own free will. Unless of course you're saying I have some special magic powers of persuasion over you audio-DBT fanatics.

Quote:
The only cross-board harrassment here comes from you.

Well, let's ignore all the irrational remarks that you make on a regular basis, and I'm going to pretend that's a rational accusation to make. That means I'm now waiting on you to provide evidence for this accusation. I provided reams of evidence of cross-forum bashing by you, Axon and other members of Hydrogen Audio. Now it's your turn to provide similar evidence. You'll have to show which OTHER forum that I am on, in which I am seen bashing this one. Good luck! p.s. If you can't, you're gonna have to get back on your knees again, and let's hear that abject grovelling simpering apology, plus retraction of your false accusation.

Quote:
shows just the level of absolutely dishonest hatred and prejudice that some people have for science and for what it teaches, I think.

LOL! That's just what a Scientologist -would- say to an "unbeliever", isn't it? You keep confusing your pseudoscientific anti-audiophile dogma for something approaching real science. Don't. Real science doesn't like you very much, "Woodinville", or whatever pseudonym you're calling yourself this week...

Quote:
I can't keep up with this cross-forum drama, but I can say that I don't feel assaulted and I am not convinced there were any sinister plots laid by the original post. Whatever the case may be, I think we should give people the benefit of the doubt before dropping our nuclear bombs.

That's why I took the time and trouble to sift through and extract relevant quotes from the "sister thread" on Hydrogen Audio, to show in a briefer form how that they had been signing up on Stereophile's forum (or reviving long dead accounts) in order to "cross-forum bash" as Lamont suggested to me.

Axon, who started the Hydrogen sister thread to the one Ethan started here, just finished confirming what I had said, when I wrote: "Axon then started the cross-forum DBT bashing". His reply was "guilty as charged". That seems pretty clear what the intent was. So if cross-forum bashing is a bannable offense, then the members of Hydrogen Audio forums have been engaging in that recently against the members of Stereophile forums. They've certainly been using insults there against us in that sister thread, which they dared not repeat here. I admit this is the first time I hear of this phenomenon, but Lamont mentioned to me that this was becoming a large problem across internet forums today.

Actually, Michigan, jj does not hide behind a pseudonym because his profile shows who he is both here and on HA.

Quote:

Quote:
I can't keep up with this cross-forum drama, but I can say that I don't feel assaulted and I am not convinced there were any sinister plots laid by the original post. Whatever the case may be, I think we should give people the benefit of the doubt before dropping our nuclear bombs.

That's why I took the time and trouble to sift through and extract relevant quotes from the "sister thread" on Hydrogen Audio, to show in a briefer form how that they had been signing up on Stereophile's forum (or reviving long dead accounts) in order to "cross-forum bash" as Lamont suggested to me.

I'm not sure how this is different from what you've done here, Michigan. Furthermore, I don't see why this is a problem. So what if people are re-posting our thoughts on another forum? Axon and others seem to have legitimate reasons for being here, as far as I'm concerned, regardless of whether I agree with them. If you suspect a person of being a troll, please don't respond to his posts. Easy, right? No need to make a soap opera out of this.