Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

For Sale Ads

FAQ / News / Events

Specialty Groups: Tube DIY Asylum

Tech Square

Welcome! You must be a registered Inmate to post in this Asylum.

AudioAsylum Trader

Tung Sol 6550 Blackplate - Here is one blackplate that tests okay with no gas...

AR and International Servicemaster 6550 and 5881 - Orphaned tubes - 6550 and 5881 - Audio Research an...

More complications for auditory evaluations. - tomservo 07:05:56 07/21/10 (14)
- You're about six months late on that video -nt - E-Stat 16:29:25 07/24/10 (10)
  - But did you actually learn anything from it? (nt) - Pat D 18:38:34 07/25/10 (7)
    - Don't know about others... but I did, quite a bit. - carcass93 08:24:12 07/26/10 (1)
      - RE: Don't know about others... but I did, quite a bit. - tomservo 11:55:06 07/26/10 (0)
    - You were right - E-Stat 06:47:53 07/26/10 (4)
      - It could be worse - kerr 07:12:46 07/26/10 (3)
        
        True - E-Stat 16:15:53 07/26/10 (2)
        
        RE: True - kerr 18:29:47 07/26/10 (1)
        
        Sorry, but in all honesty I cannot take full credit - E-Stat 19:03:10 07/27/10 (0)
  - RE: You're about six months late on that video -nt - tomservo 17:13:08 07/24/10 (1)
    - I was referring to the first occurence of linking that video -nt - E-Stat 17:03:46 07/26/10 (0)
- RE: More complications for auditory evaluations. - josh358 20:56:05 07/22/10 (0)
- RE: More complications for auditory evaluations. - Pat D 15:24:53 07/21/10 (1)
  - RE: More complications for auditory evaluations. - tomservo 09:33:59 07/22/10 (0)
a tale of bias. The irony of the common held beliefs of many objectivists - Analog Scott 13:30:55 07/19/10 (133)
- Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Jay Buridan 09:00:26 07/29/10 (5)
  - Thank you - Don Till 16:10:29 08/05/10 (0)
  - RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Pat D 19:17:51 08/01/10 (0)
  - RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Tony Lauck 13:59:13 07/29/10 (0)
  - RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - rick_m 13:15:29 07/29/10 (0)
  - RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Tony Lauck 09:50:51 07/29/10 (0)
- Ever hear of the argumentem ad hominem fallacy? - Pat D 14:59:47 07/21/10 (18)
  - Funny that I predicted you would jump in and try to take this on some bizarre tangent. - Analog Scott 02:29:44 07/22/10 (14)
    - You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 05:11:28 07/22/10 (13)
      - "What points are you *trying* to make?" - Analog Scott 12:49:19 07/22/10 (0)
      - RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - kerr 06:43:21 07/22/10 (11)
        
        actually there is a lot to be learned from 'each side." - Analog Scott 10:38:09 07/22/10 (1)
        
        Nice post - thanks. Well said (nt) - kerr 04:40:25 07/23/10 (0)
        
        RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 08:43:20 07/22/10 (7)
        
        RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Analog Scott 12:55:51 07/22/10 (6)
        
        RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 16:37:42 07/22/10 (5)
        
        *spits out a fine cup of coffee* - robert young 08:00:40 07/24/10 (4)
        
        That's priceless - E-Stat 08:07:58 07/24/10 (3)
        
        I keep wondering how many times I have to link this . . . - Pat D 11:40:24 07/24/10 (2)
        
        You have no idea why I'm laughing at you, do you? - robert young 13:05:32 07/24/10 (1)
        
        He doesn't get it, does he? -nt - E-Stat 16:10:08 07/24/10 (0)
        
        This is one of those cases when the process itself IS the goal - and... - carcass93 08:31:19 07/22/10 (0)
  - Where's your meta-analysis? Better than that here is the meta-analyst - Don Till 20:37:05 07/21/10 (2)
    - Is that a picture of Analog Scott? (nt) - Pat D 05:43:49 07/22/10 (1)
      - Is your question what passes as humor? - carcass93 11:18:14 07/22/10 (0)
- And your position is what? - Don Till 12:54:09 07/21/10 (3)
  - the one you quoted - Analog Scott 13:45:35 07/21/10 (2)
    - RE: the one you quoted - Don Till 16:03:10 07/21/10 (1)
      - "All I can say is this is just the typical vomit posing as critical thinking on an audio website." - Analog Scott 02:39:35 07/22/10 (0)
- Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Enophile 14:24:23 07/20/10 (91)
  - What "good", together with "bad", objectivists fail to understand,... - carcass93 14:28:54 07/21/10 (0)
  - I guess you didn't follow the links to the two threads I cited - Analog Scott 01:25:39 07/21/10 (74)
    - Don't you believe in replication? - Pat D 05:43:59 07/21/10 (73)
      - I don't believe in cherry picking - Analog Scott 10:02:59 07/21/10 (7)
        
        RE: I don't believe in cherry picking - Pat D 15:13:20 07/21/10 (5)
        
        try to stay on topic Pat - Analog Scott 12:47:59 07/22/10 (4)
        
        You OP was confused and offered no supporting evidence. - Pat D 19:05:46 07/22/10 (3)
        
        No really, try to stay on topic - Analog Scott 03:05:51 07/23/10 (2)
        
        You don't even seem to know what your original post was about! - Pat D 06:46:38 07/23/10 (1)
        
        yeah right Pat. Even as pure obfusecation that is pretty weak. - Analog Scott 09:03:24 07/23/10 (0)
        
        RE: I don't believe in cherry picking - Tony Lauck 12:35:12 07/21/10 (0)
      - Zactly. - Enophile 08:16:58 07/21/10 (5)
        
        RE: Zactly. - josh358 18:55:35 07/22/10 (0)
        
        And that has what to do with anything I have said? - Analog Scott 10:05:52 07/21/10 (2)
        
        "And that has what to do with anything I have said?" Yup, just chatting about the dichotomy. - Enophile 10:54:08 07/21/10 (1)
        
        RE: "And that has what to do with anything I have said?" Yup, just chatting about the dichotomy. - Analog Scott 11:23:50 07/21/10 (0)
        
        RE: Zactly. - kerr 09:04:18 07/21/10 (0)
      - RE: Why should anyone accept some anomalous result without replication? - rick_m 07:17:26 07/21/10 (58)
        
        Do people try their hardest to get the righmost post under "classic view"? - kurt s 07:12:31 08/12/10 (1)
        
        RE: Do people try their hardest to get the righmost post under "classic view"? - rick_m 08:22:02 08/12/10 (0)
        
        RE: Why should anyone accept some anomalous result without replication? - Pat D 08:17:33 07/21/10 (55)
        
        So Pat, why haven't you brought up this point with the other example i cited? - Analog Scott 11:02:32 07/22/10 (54)
        
        Have I cited that article? - Pat D 16:15:05 07/22/10 (53)
        
        No, I cited it. You chose to ignore it. More cherry picking - Analog Scott 03:07:48 07/23/10 (52)
        
        How could you cite it since you don't even seem to know what it was? - Pat D 06:18:51 07/23/10 (51)
        
        You never have been one to let the facts get in the way of your beliefs. two simple facts - Analog Scott 09:12:53 07/23/10 (50)
        
        LOL! Prove the 1985 article exists! (nt) - Pat D 11:14:27 07/23/10 (49)
        
        Seriously? do you want me to prove Russia exists too since you haven't seen it in person? - Analog Scott 11:25:04 07/23/10 (48)
        
        Who wrote the alleged 1985 article? What is its title? - Pat D 19:12:49 07/23/10 (47)
        
        actually I misremembered. it was a 1987 article - Analog Scott 16:58:45 07/24/10 (1)
        
        RE: actually I misremembered. it was a 1987 article - Pat D 19:52:59 07/24/10 (0)
        
        Its great fun to stay away from this sandbox for a while... - robert young 07:55:34 07/24/10 (44)
        
        AS wants to argue about an article he doesnt have. - Pat D 10:38:22 07/24/10 (43)
        
        You are wasting your debating skills... - robert young 11:18:47 07/24/10 (42)
        
        RE: You are wasting your debating skills... - Pat D 16:09:26 07/24/10 (41)
        
        I predicted 20 posts of pure obfuscation from you on this thread - Analog Scott 17:03:52 07/24/10 (30)
        
        Have you found those FR differences you mentioned that exceed known audible thresholds yet? - Pat D 18:15:23 07/24/10 (29)
        
        I am truly very sorry if you believe - E-Stat 18:33:00 07/26/10 (28)
        
        Irrelevant remarks. - Pat D 19:20:11 07/26/10 (27)
        
        Absolutely - E-Stat 05:59:31 07/27/10 (26)
        
        RE: Absolutely - Pat D 09:03:08 07/27/10 (25)
        
        Simple - E-Stat 09:28:28 07/27/10 (24)
        
        You are totally confused. - Pat D 20:04:52 07/28/10 (23)
        
        Apparently, you are unaware of how dated your source is - E-Stat 07:30:13 07/29/10 (22)
        
        It's not my source but one Analog Scott was using to make some point or other. - Pat D 12:18:16 07/29/10 (21)
        
        I caught Analog Scott out on two things. - Analog Scott 07:30:08 07/30/10 (16)
        
        RE: I caught Analog Scott out on two things. - Pat D 18:39:14 07/31/10 (15)
        
        Gotta hand it to ya Pat. you never have been one to let facts get in your way - Analog Scott 19:54:14 07/31/10 (14)
        
        When you have to hurl personal accusations to prove your point, youve already lost the argument. - Pat D 20:29:55 08/03/10 (13)
        
        Let me know when that happens. - Analog Scott 17:15:39 08/04/10 (11)
        
        Well, you may have points, but no real arguments for them. - Pat D 17:37:08 08/05/10 (10)
        
        You have no arguments that I have no argument - Analog Scott 13:42:52 08/06/10 (9)
        
        I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 08:31:19 08/08/10 (8)
        
        RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Analog Scott 17:48:03 08/08/10 (4)
        
        RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 06:27:37 08/09/10 (3)
        
        RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Analog Scott 02:43:37 08/11/10 (2)
        
        RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 05:39:56 08/11/10 (1)
        
        Now I have the rightmost post in "classic view". nt - kurt s 07:19:31 08/12/10 (0)
        
        RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Tony Lauck 09:51:28 08/08/10 (2)
        
        I got to the part about... - kerr 06:28:49 08/09/10 (1)
        
        RE: I got to the part about... - Tony Lauck 10:48:47 08/09/10 (0)
        
        I missed the connection between the title of your post and the content. nt - Tony Lauck 09:27:39 08/04/10 (0)
        
        Congratulations - E-Stat 12:51:44 07/29/10 (3)
        
        "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - robert young 17:59:46 07/29/10 (2)
        
        RE: "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - Tony Lauck 18:55:49 07/29/10 (1)
        
        RE: "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - robert young 00:40:31 07/30/10 (0)
        
        And what's more.... - robert young 16:58:42 07/24/10 (9)
        
        RE: And what's more.... - Pat D 18:32:39 07/24/10 (8)
        
        I'm still laughing... - robert young 20:44:50 07/24/10 (7)
        
        LOL - Pat D 05:27:05 07/25/10 (6)
        
        No, not THAT world, Pat. - carcass93 08:15:30 07/25/10 (2)
        
        Yeah, illusions can be fun. - Pat D 09:23:26 07/25/10 (1)
        
        I suppose - kerr 04:38:48 07/26/10 (0)
        
        An adult using LOL and GMAB.... - robert young 07:40:17 07/25/10 (2)
        
        Hmmm . . . I learned most of such acronym here at AA. (nt) - Pat D 09:24:50 07/25/10 (1)
        
        Oh, GMAB! - kerr 04:40:30 07/26/10 (0)
  - RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 15:14:09 07/20/10 (14)
    - RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 23:47:20 07/22/10 (13)
      - RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 18:31:28 07/23/10 (12)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 19:14:59 07/23/10 (11)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 05:53:07 07/24/10 (10)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 16:14:46 07/24/10 (9)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 17:14:07 07/24/10 (8)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 18:40:25 07/24/10 (7)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 20:10:08 07/24/10 (0)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 19:11:48 07/24/10 (5)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 11:54:27 07/25/10 (0)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 05:30:32 07/25/10 (3)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 07:53:44 07/25/10 (2)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - morricab 13:37:01 07/25/10 (1)
        
        RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 17:51:10 07/25/10 (0)
- Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Tony Lauck 09:41:05 07/20/10 (2)
  - RE: Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Analog Scott 10:34:57 07/20/10 (1)
    - RE: Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Tony Lauck 12:47:53 07/20/10 (0)
- So IOW, objectivists are biased because they believe in bias? - Presto 21:28:17 07/19/10 (8)
  - Not what I am saying at all but... - Analog Scott 09:49:09 07/20/10 (7)
    - RE: Not what I am saying at all but... - thetubeguy1954 15:04:41 07/21/10 (6)
      - Did any of the objetivists even understand the point you wre trying to make A.S.? - Analog Scott 02:37:05 07/22/10 (0)
      - You will never convince a skeptic with evidence - Tony Lauck 17:49:12 07/21/10 (4)
        
        You just define skeptic that way. - Pat D 08:26:09 07/22/10 (3)
        
        RE: You just define skeptic that way. - josh358 19:36:24 07/22/10 (0)
        
        RE: You just define skeptic that way. - Tony Lauck 10:22:19 07/22/10 (1)
        
        RE: You just define skeptic that way. - Pat D 19:19:22 07/22/10 (0)
Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - KlausR. 22:20:52 07/05/10 (30)
- RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - josh358 19:07:41 07/13/10 (12)
  - RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 08:41:52 07/20/10 (11)
    - RE: Echo threshold - josh358 16:37:43 07/20/10 (10)
      - RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 05:22:32 07/23/10 (9)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - josh358 19:50:35 07/23/10 (8)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 06:35:26 07/28/10 (7)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - josh358 10:30:09 07/28/10 (6)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 23:14:06 08/03/10 (5)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - josh358 05:59:14 08/04/10 (4)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 22:35:03 08/11/10 (3)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - josh358 16:29:35 08/12/10 (2)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - KlausR. 22:03:04 08/20/10 (1)
        
        RE: Echo threshold - josh358 06:34:16 08/21/10 (0)
- RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - tomservo 07:22:53 07/06/10 (16)
  - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - KlausR. 01:30:12 07/08/10 (15)
    - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - tomservo 09:20:02 07/08/10 (6)
      - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - KlausR. 22:04:09 07/09/10 (2)
        
        RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - tomservo 10:26:49 07/10/10 (1)
        
        RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - KlausR. 00:30:05 07/12/10 (0)
      - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - Donald North 20:02:52 07/08/10 (2)
        
        RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - tomservo 14:45:18 07/09/10 (1)
        
        Outdoor listening - Donald North 15:37:45 07/09/10 (0)
    - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - Tony Lauck 09:11:19 07/08/10 (6)
      - RE: Early reflections: 5 ms time window for sound source localisation? - tomservo 15:17:29 07/09/10 (0)
      - RE: One can not have a high end system without a suitable room - KlausR. 09:06:56 07/09/10 (4)
        
        RE: One can not have a high end system without a suitable room - Tony Lauck 09:34:51 07/09/10 (3)
        
        RE: One can not have a high end system without a suitable room - KlausR. 04:15:31 07/10/10 (2)
        
        RE: One can not have a high end system without a suitable room - Tony Lauck 07:18:33 07/10/10 (1)
        
        RE: One can not have a high end system without a suitable room - KlausR. 00:50:22 07/11/10 (0)
    - RE: Cabinet edge diffraction. - rick_m 07:11:17 07/08/10 (0)
Whatever became of cheap-Jack? - Ray Moth 23:42:35 07/04/10 (0)
Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - carcass93 12:14:29 06/24/10 (152)
- Looks like they locked the thread down over on HA - Analog Scott 08:17:26 07/04/10 (1)
  - You're not alone - several people there said something to that extent. - carcass93 10:00:42 07/04/10 (0)
- It's an expression of Sean Olive's preferences for listening to stereo recordings. - Pat D 02:03:03 07/02/10 (40)
  - Pat, to put it bluntly: nobody here gives a damn.... - carcass93 12:30:24 07/02/10 (6)
    - I tried to tell others what your purpose was . . . - Pat D 12:36:08 07/02/10 (5)
      - It isn't that no one believed you, Pat... - robert young 14:46:32 07/02/10 (3)
        
        I'm begging you - please tell me it was obvious what my purpose was. - carcass93 18:08:00 07/02/10 (1)
        
        I hope it was to entertain me. - robert young 20:07:45 07/02/10 (0)
        
        Gee, that's funny - E-Stat 15:10:47 07/02/10 (0)
      - I'm always at a loss of words when somebody pretends... - carcass93 13:01:50 07/02/10 (0)
  - Clearly he prefers - E-Stat 08:34:39 07/02/10 (32)
    - RE: Clearly he prefers - Pat D 08:45:24 07/02/10 (31)
      - "It's an expression of Sean Olive's preferences for listening to stereo recordings." - Analog Scott 09:03:10 07/04/10 (3)
        
        RE: "It's an expression of Sean Olive's preferences for listening to stereo recordings." - Phelonious Ponk 05:57:20 07/06/10 (2)
        
        RE: "It's an expression of Sean Olive's preferences for listening to stereo recordings." - Analog Scott 06:00:39 07/06/10 (1)
        
        RE: "It's an expression of Sean Olive's preferences for listening to stereo recordings." - Phelonious Ponk 14:17:41 07/06/10 (0)
      - Follow the link - E-Stat 09:00:23 07/02/10 (26)
        
        RE: Follow the link - Pat D 10:32:49 07/02/10 (25)
        
        Tell me - E-Stat 11:03:58 07/02/10 (24)
        
        RE: Tell me - Pat D 11:45:41 07/02/10 (23)
        
        Once again you have an aversion to answering simple questions - E-Stat 12:03:10 07/02/10 (22)
        
        Actually, I did answer it. I said it was irrelevant. (nt) - Pat D 12:15:23 07/02/10 (21)
        
        In that case, we'll ignore your uninformed speculations -nt - E-Stat 12:49:41 07/02/10 (20)
        
        It's mentioned in the link you already provided. - Pat D 19:36:01 07/02/10 (19)
        
        What suddenly caused the webpage - E-Stat 21:16:07 07/02/10 (18)
        
        What are you trying to imply? - Pat D 07:41:37 07/03/10 (17)
        
        Yes, implying! What is the relevance? - Pat D 08:47:23 07/03/10 (15)
        
        I read fine about the availability to do such in cars - E-Stat 09:01:24 07/03/10 (14)
        
        HT, home audio, car audio, PC and Mac . . . versatile software. - Pat D 09:28:23 07/03/10 (13)
        
        We have now returned full circle to my original observation - E-Stat 09:31:24 07/03/10 (12)
        
        Now you're changing your story to be more correct! - Pat D 11:46:03 07/03/10 (11)
        
        What makes you think that the "Logic 7 car stereo decoder" - E-Stat 11:48:36 07/03/10 (10)
        
        Did I make a pronouncement either way on that? - Pat D 16:08:48 07/03/10 (9)
        
        The core kernel... - E-Stat 07:25:59 07/04/10 (8)
        
        RE: In other words, it isn't -nt - theaudiohobby 02:59:11 07/06/10 (7)
        
        Nonsense. It works identically - E-Stat 09:21:25 07/06/10 (6)
        
        RE: As expected, you've modified your comments, it's now - theaudiohobby 12:03:12 07/06/10 (5)
        
        What other standpoint is there? - E-Stat 12:12:37 07/06/10 (4)
        
        RE: What other standpoint is there? - Tony Lauck 13:00:23 07/06/10 (3)
        
        Let's return to the context of this discussion - E-Stat 13:18:41 07/06/10 (2)
        
        Pat's Authority is Peddling this stuff... - Tony Lauck 14:04:42 07/06/10 (1)
        
        "Peddling" indeed - E-Stat 14:20:23 07/06/10 (0)
        
        Imply? - E-Stat 07:58:27 07/03/10 (0)
- RE: Since music reproduction is imagined anyway... - gymwear5@hotmail.com 08:41:38 06/29/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - rjd 20:32:17 06/26/10 (0)
- That "sense of envelopment and spaciousness" . . . - caspian@peak.org 11:23:05 06/26/10 (2)
  - RE: That "sense of envelopment and spaciousness" . . . - Pat D 17:18:45 07/01/10 (1)
    - Audience vs. performer perspective - caspian@peak.org 13:25:56 07/04/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Phelonious Ponk 05:17:15 06/26/10 (36)
  - OMG - Dawnrazor 23:28:32 07/04/10 (3)
    - RE: OMG - Phelonious Ponk 05:21:53 07/05/10 (2)
      - Yet, in Wilson ads... - E-Stat 09:14:33 07/05/10 (1)
        
        RE: Yet, in Wilson ads... - Phelonious Ponk 06:10:42 07/07/10 (0)
  - OK... how about a test in linked HA thread - is that also advancing "science"? - carcass93 09:10:02 06/28/10 (23)
    - RE: OK... how about a test in linked HA thread - is that also advancing "science"? - Phelonious Ponk 17:56:55 06/28/10 (0)
    - LOL! You should get your facts straight . . . - Pat D 10:53:54 06/28/10 (21)
      - I love when somebody like you takes exception - helps everybody to see your depth,... - carcass93 11:21:18 06/28/10 (20)
        
        I should correct you on your logic, too. - Pat D 20:31:11 07/02/10 (18)
        
        Why did you post a link to jj's bio? - robert young 09:14:39 07/03/10 (15)
        
        RE: Why did you post a link to jj's bio? - Tony Lauck 07:24:46 07/05/10 (7)
        
        Mellowed? I would hope so - E-Stat 09:08:29 07/05/10 (1)
        
        Nothing has changed in the 4 years since... - robert young 11:40:32 07/05/10 (0)
        
        He acts like it wasn't his responsibility... - robert young 07:32:44 07/05/10 (4)
        
        RE: He acts like it wasn't his responsibility... - Pat D 10:34:44 07/05/10 (3)
        
        RE: He acts like it wasn't his responsibility... - robert young 05:09:10 07/06/10 (2)
        
        His posts tended to be lossy, too. :) -nt - E-Stat 10:45:35 07/06/10 (1)
        
        If he were here, he'd demand an immediate apology for your inflammatory post :) (nt) - kerr 09:18:38 07/09/10 (0)
        
        RE: Why did you post a link to jj's bio? - Pat D 17:32:22 07/04/10 (4)
        
        "not know who jj is" - yeah... like that's possible. - carcass93 08:00:44 07/05/10 (0)
        
        No "problem with that." - robert young 05:04:23 07/05/10 (2)
        
        RE: No "problem with that." - Pat D 10:32:34 07/05/10 (1)
        
        Missed my own typo! - robert young 05:10:19 07/06/10 (0)
        
        I, too, posted a jj link! - Tony Lauck 14:31:35 07/03/10 (1)
        
        I'd be worried about you too... - robert young 15:20:47 07/03/10 (0)
        
        Who are the Grand Inquisitors? - Tony Lauck 07:45:32 07/03/10 (1)
        
        {Ego meets Cognitive dissonance} "I heard you twice the first time" ~NT - Cleantimestream 08:02:27 07/14/10 (0)
        
        Have you compared Sean Olive's multi-channel system with stereo? - Pat D 12:01:15 06/28/10 (0)
  - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Analog Scott 01:02:48 06/27/10 (7)
    - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Phelonious Ponk 04:25:35 06/27/10 (6)
      - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Analog Scott 06:33:53 06/27/10 (5)
        
        RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Phelonious Ponk 09:06:21 06/27/10 (4)
        
        RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Analog Scott 09:50:27 06/27/10 (3)
        
        RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Phelonious Ponk 17:37:23 06/27/10 (2)
        
        RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Analog Scott 01:44:13 06/28/10 (1)
        
        RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Phelonious Ponk 03:35:02 06/28/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Todd Krieger 00:02:15 06/26/10 (0)
- If I ever heard a MC that impressed me I might be interested, but even then there is the expense of adding - Norm 19:57:33 06/25/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Don Till 18:25:33 06/25/10 (0)
- Vertually ALL multichannel is FAKE! - Don_C 15:24:58 06/25/10 (5)
  - ALL music is FAKE! - Dr. Philosophy 06:45:01 07/03/10 (0)
  - Fake what? It's all an illusion and its all fake. - Don Till 18:38:11 06/25/10 (1)
    - It's ALL fake. :-) - Tony Lauck 06:33:41 06/26/10 (0)
  - You should change that to ALL RECORDINGS ARE FAKE nt - Robert Hamel 18:26:16 06/25/10 (1)
    - Yabbut some are faker than others... (nt) - Presto 22:37:11 07/04/10 (0)
- I enjoy both - Robert Hamel 15:02:59 06/25/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - tomservo 09:25:35 06/25/10 (0)
- Simple - kerr 07:22:40 06/25/10 (0)
- a few thoughts. after all this was a conversation i was having with Sean.. - Analog Scott 04:13:30 06/25/10 (43)
  - BTW, there is a use for the VPI Bricks - E-Stat 13:24:42 06/25/10 (0)
  - Sean Olive? -nt - E-Stat 10:42:23 06/25/10 (41)
    - Bingo. N/T - carcass93 10:45:28 06/25/10 (40)
      - I was reading his latest blog - E-Stat 12:12:06 06/25/10 (39)
        
        It's pretty amusing to watch him butting heads with AJinFLA over on Hydrogen,... - carcass93 12:40:40 06/25/10 (38)
        
        It's pretty amusing to watch c-93 misuse the English language. - Pat D 14:15:21 06/29/10 (37)
        
        Did you write that? It's terrible English. - robert young 15:09:41 06/30/10 (36)
        
        Since you haven't followed the discussion . . . - Pat D 18:36:02 06/30/10 (35)
        
        So you can somehow tell what posts I read? - robert young 04:26:00 07/01/10 (12)
        
        RE: So you can somehow tell what posts I read? - Pat D 07:34:24 07/01/10 (11)
        
        You're lost in translation, Pat. - robert young 13:03:40 07/01/10 (4)
        
        So where was c93 "spot on?" - Pat D 16:24:12 07/01/10 (3)
        
        Umm, he got two out of three. You identified the one, so the answer must be the other two. - robert young 09:43:59 07/02/10 (2)
        
        RE: Umm, he got two out of three. You identified the one, so the answer must be the other two. - Pat D 10:45:01 07/02/10 (1)
        
        It is geting worse for you. But it IS amusing to witness. - robert young 14:42:27 07/02/10 (0)
        
        You're still not being very clear - E-Stat 08:27:38 07/01/10 (5)
        
        Center channel. - Pat D 10:37:12 07/01/10 (4)
        
        You chose to NOT answer my question - E-Stat 10:51:26 07/01/10 (3)
        
        If you want Sean Olive's opinion, ask him. - Pat D 12:29:29 07/01/10 (2)
        
        Curious backpeddling - E-Stat 12:37:40 07/01/10 (1)
        
        Not me. - Pat D 12:48:10 07/01/10 (0)
        
        RE: Since you haven't followed the discussion . . . - Tony Lauck 19:30:35 06/30/10 (21)
        
        RE: Since you haven't followed the discussion . . . - Pat D 07:31:22 07/01/10 (20)
        
        RE: Since you haven't followed the discussion . . . - Tony Lauck 08:07:05 07/01/10 (19)
        
        Nonsense. - Pat D 10:17:16 07/01/10 (18)
        
        Please stop embarrassing yourself. - robert young 13:14:01 07/01/10 (2)
        
        Why don't you read the whole text for context? - Pat D 14:14:18 07/01/10 (1)
        
        I did, and many here have, and you're still wrong... - robert young 04:47:58 07/02/10 (0)
        
        I decline to take a third dip in your pool of confusion. nt - Tony Lauck 12:01:16 07/01/10 (14)
        
        You're the one confused. - Pat D 01:53:07 07/02/10 (13)
        
        Read Olive's quote again Pat: the system is not a specific one. - robert young 05:39:22 07/02/10 (12)
        
        Changes nothing relevant. - Pat D 08:39:14 07/02/10 (8)
        
        But I didn't atack Sean, I attacked your interpretation of what he wrote. - robert young 09:29:27 07/02/10 (7)
        
        I never said *you* did. - Pat D 10:32:02 07/02/10 (6)
        
        RE: I never said *you* did. - robert young 20:05:03 07/02/10 (5)
        
        What I did in concurring with C93's observation - E-Stat 07:49:54 07/03/10 (4)
        
        It's is - if he's your idol, that you worship, and are never allowed to question. N/T - carcass93 08:28:06 07/03/10 (3)
        
        Naw, you're my idol (nt) - Pat D 16:10:01 07/03/10 (2)
        
        Is that the "whether you mean it or not" part of Flanders & Swan? :) - kerr 05:10:07 07/04/10 (1)
        
        RE: Is that the "whether you mean it or not" part of Flanders & Swan? :) - Pat D 17:34:34 07/04/10 (0)
        
        RE: Read Olive's quote again Pat: the system is not a specific one. - Tony Lauck 07:08:17 07/02/10 (2)
        
        RE: HA - rick_m 08:46:17 07/04/10 (0)
        
        "why HA continues to exist" - it's a social club, that just happens... - carcass93 18:34:47 07/02/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Tony Lauck 14:34:55 06/24/10 (2)
  - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - kerr 07:20:08 06/25/10 (1)
    - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Tony Lauck 07:32:54 06/25/10 (0)
- "Real multichannel" - E-Stat 12:44:12 06/24/10 (3)
  - Are you sayin... - mkuller 19:08:35 06/24/10 (1)
    - I remember hearing my first Quadraphonic recording - E-Stat 06:09:59 06/25/10 (0)
  - Eloquently put. I agree 1000% (nt) - Presto 12:55:16 06/24/10 (0)
- RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - Presto 12:38:32 06/24/10 (3)
  - RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). - soulfood 06:02:03 06/26/10 (0)
  - See - we can actually agree on something! But my point is this: - carcass93 12:56:51 06/24/10 (1)
    - Naturally - E-Stat 13:22:53 06/24/10 (0)
Power cord realities and illusions - Don Till 20:00:21 06/17/10 (166)
- Wow, this is one of the best and most coherent posts/threads I've seen on AA. - jihad 14:03:22 07/12/10 (0)
- There Is a Company that Follows Your Ideals........... - Todd Krieger 00:12:55 06/22/10 (1)
  - RE: There Is a Company that Follows Your Ideals........... - Don Till 17:48:11 06/24/10 (0)
- Get a clue, Don, no one cares what you think is true. nt - Norm 17:43:27 06/19/10 (4)
  - I care! nt - Dr. Philosophy 13:23:19 06/22/10 (0)
  - A clue? Geez Norm you care and you care enough to respond! - Don Till 08:53:02 06/20/10 (2)
    - "I had to think a tiny bit about it in order to come up with a cognitive response. " - robert young 19:38:54 06/20/10 (0)
    - As I said. nt - Norm 11:50:34 06/20/10 (0)
- RE: Power cord realities and illusions - tomservo 17:39:55 06/18/10 (144)
  - RE: Power cord realities and illusions - cabelok 00:12:51 10/08/15 (5)
    - RE: Power cord realities and illusions - geoffkait 06:30:50 10/25/15 (4)
      - RE: Power cord realities and illusions - cabelok 12:08:42 10/26/15 (3)
        
        RE: Power cord realities and illusions - geoffkait 12:27:24 10/27/15 (2)
        
        RE: Power cord realities and illusions - fantja 14:17:40 01/27/16 (0)
        
        RE: Power cord realities and illusions - fantja 14:16:54 01/27/16 (0)
  - RE: Power cord realities and illusions - Todd Krieger 00:38:50 06/22/10 (0)
  - So - E-Stat 19:15:56 06/18/10 (136)
    - RE: So - tomservo 20:18:29 06/18/10 (135)
      - Please describe - E-Stat 20:53:18 06/18/10 (134)
        
        RE: Please describe - tomservo 06:58:17 06/19/10 (133)
        
        Theory is great - E-Stat 07:11:08 06/19/10 (132)
        
        RE: Theory is great - tomservo 09:03:43 06/19/10 (88)
        
        "As I recall, the total capacitance was equal to about 4 inches of the least capacitive cable " - E-Stat 09:19:12 06/19/10 (87)
        
        RE: "As I recall, the total capacitance was equal to about 4 inches of the least capacitive cable " - tomservo 10:17:01 06/19/10 (86)
        
        Darn Tom...............I thought you were just a regular guy! {smile} ~NT - Cleantimestream 20:05:05 06/22/10 (0)
        
        I will definitely agree - E-Stat 11:21:11 06/19/10 (84)
        
        You're really grasping at straws. - Pat D 16:53:41 06/20/10 (83)
        
        "burden of proof" thing again...... - Sordidman 09:18:27 06/21/10 (54)
        
        RE: "burden of proof" thing again...... - Phelonious Ponk 03:59:20 06/28/10 (44)
        
        Observation cannot be subjective or objective - Sordidman 07:47:05 06/28/10 (43)
        
        RE: Observation cannot be subjective or objective - Phelonious Ponk 17:34:44 06/28/10 (42)
        
        No: accuracy has never been defined - Sordidman 08:39:29 06/29/10 (17)
        
        RE: No: accuracy has never been defined - Phelonious Ponk 10:27:20 06/29/10 (16)
        
        "faithful" is a terribly subjective, undefined term - Sordidman 11:17:06 06/29/10 (15)
        
        RE: "faithful" is a terribly subjective, undefined term - Phelonious Ponk 11:37:19 06/29/10 (14)
        
        GAMUT CD players - Sordidman 12:27:07 06/29/10 (13)
        
        RE: GAMUT CD players - Tony Lauck 15:01:15 06/29/10 (4)
        
        Can you define the "standard?" - Sordidman 15:20:30 06/29/10 (3)
        
        RE: Can you define the "standard?" - Tony Lauck 15:28:29 06/29/10 (2)
        
        The GamuT design (at least the CD-1 that I use) - E-Stat 17:33:05 06/29/10 (0)
        
        If you want to listen to 2 discs - Sordidman 15:46:18 06/29/10 (0)
        
        RE: GAMUT CD players - Phelonious Ponk 14:42:27 06/29/10 (7)
        
        Guess you didn't read my post - Sordidman 15:37:53 06/29/10 (6)
        
        Actually, I did... - Phelonious Ponk 16:16:45 06/29/10 (5)
        
        RE: Actually, I did... - Sordidman 17:02:01 06/29/10 (4)
        
        RE: Actually, I did... - Phelonious Ponk 17:44:39 06/29/10 (3)
        
        sadly: vagaries are all we have -t - Sordidman 18:06:01 06/29/10 (2)
        
        Well, they're all you have - NT - Phelonious Ponk 05:08:18 06/30/10 (1)
        
        No correspondance hearing is fallable, and a moving target -t - Sordidman 10:14:20 07/01/10 (0)
        
        "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Tony Lauck 19:05:59 06/28/10 (23)
        
        RE: "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Phelonious Ponk 20:14:04 06/28/10 (22)
        
        RE: "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Tony Lauck 06:29:17 06/29/10 (21)
        
        RE: "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Phelonious Ponk 08:02:03 06/29/10 (20)
        
        RE: "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Tony Lauck 08:40:30 06/29/10 (19)
        
        RE: "Accuracy": not simple, alas - Phelonious Ponk 11:02:56 06/29/10 (18)
        
        Sarcasm aside: you're pretty much on target here - Sordidman 11:21:07 06/29/10 (17)
        
        RE: Sarcasm aside: you're pretty much on target here - Phelonious Ponk 12:11:42 06/29/10 (16)
        
        Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Sordidman 12:33:39 06/29/10 (15)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Phelonious Ponk 14:57:40 06/29/10 (14)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - kerr 05:29:09 06/30/10 (13)
        
        Yes, you are right on with that......... -t - Sordidman 10:38:09 06/30/10 (0)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Phelonious Ponk 06:44:58 06/30/10 (3)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - kerr 10:02:20 06/30/10 (2)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Phelonious Ponk 11:59:12 06/30/10 (1)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - kerr 16:33:08 06/30/10 (0)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Tony Lauck 06:20:44 06/30/10 (7)
        
        You said this much better than I did - Sordidman 10:36:59 06/30/10 (0)
        
        Agreed (nt) - kerr 10:03:13 06/30/10 (0)
        
        RE: Until everyone agrees on what an objective value is - Phelonious Ponk 06:39:45 06/30/10 (4)
        
        ""I don't need proof to understand that is nonsense."" - Sordidman 10:47:37 06/30/10 (3)
        
        RE: ""I don't need proof to understand that is nonsense."" - Phelonious Ponk 12:10:24 06/30/10 (2)
        
        You have made a number of interesting posts - Sordidman 08:03:33 07/02/10 (1)
        
        RE: You have made a number of interesting posts - Phelonious Ponk 17:19:04 07/02/10 (0)
        
        Not artistic interpretation, just whether there is an audible difference. - Pat D 11:31:42 06/22/10 (8)
        
        Sorry to hear that you cannot - E-Stat 16:20:39 06/22/10 (3)
        
        No wonder you don't understand science! (nt) - Pat D 18:22:23 06/22/10 (2)
        
        Such a shallow concept of science, as - E-Stat 19:38:29 06/22/10 (1)
        
        You seem to have no scientific strategies. - Pat D 19:24:23 06/23/10 (0)
        
        I can - and you cannot. What test in the world would change that? N/T - carcass93 13:08:46 06/22/10 (2)
        
        Writing again without knowledge, I see. (nt) - Pat D 18:21:03 06/22/10 (1)
        
        "I see" - that's the thing, Patty... you don't. And that, ... - carcass93 09:14:27 06/23/10 (0)
        
        Only ever one way to tell: conduct the test -t - Sordidman 12:32:32 06/22/10 (0)
        
        If you recall - E-Stat 18:30:58 06/20/10 (27)
        
        What is the objective of the test? - Pat D 18:49:54 06/20/10 (26)
        
        Look up the concept "control" - E-Stat 19:08:55 06/20/10 (25)
        
        Not responsive.. - Pat D 19:53:01 06/20/10 (24)
        
        RE: Not responsive.. - kerr 05:10:01 06/21/10 (15)
        
        RE: Not responsive.. - tomservo 08:56:27 06/21/10 (12)
        
        RE: Not responsive.. - kerr 09:54:36 06/21/10 (8)
        
        Exactly - E-Stat 11:24:34 06/21/10 (7)
        
        RE: Exactly - tomservo 14:25:37 06/21/10 (5)
        
        You have proven that which is already known - E-Stat 14:43:13 06/21/10 (4)
        
        RE: You have proven that which is already known - tomservo 15:26:01 06/21/10 (3)
        
        All of that is pretty cool, but - E-Stat 15:33:22 06/21/10 (2)
        
        RE: All of that is pretty cool, but - tomservo 08:33:01 06/22/10 (1)
        
        What I was interested in - E-Stat 08:39:27 06/22/10 (0)
        
        RE: Exactly - kerr 11:59:54 06/21/10 (0)
        
        The challenge with theory - E-Stat 09:11:34 06/21/10 (2)
        
        RE: The challenge with theory - tomservo 10:08:29 06/21/10 (1)
        
        I've done better! - E-Stat 10:43:13 06/21/10 (0)
        
        RE: Not responsive.. - Pat D 08:33:29 06/21/10 (1)
        
        RE: Not responsive.. - kerr 09:28:09 06/21/10 (0)
        
        Hmmm - E-Stat 20:20:00 06/20/10 (7)
        
        RE: Hmmm - Pat D 08:38:35 06/21/10 (6)
        
        The relevant point is that both of them rely upon switch boxes -nt - E-Stat 08:48:01 06/21/10 (5)
        
        RE: The relevant point is that both of them rely upon switch boxes -nt - tomservo 09:00:02 06/22/10 (4)
        
        Apparently, I'm just not getting through - E-Stat 09:11:15 06/22/10 (3)
        
        RE: Apparently, I'm just not getting through - kerr 13:21:53 06/22/10 (0)
        
        RE: Apparently, I'm just not getting through - tomservo 11:13:26 06/22/10 (1)
        
        I give up :) -nt - E-Stat 11:29:34 06/22/10 (0)
        
        RE: Theory is great - mls-stl 08:00:16 06/19/10 (42)
        
        RE: Theory is great - tomservo 09:22:33 06/19/10 (1)
        
        "A test without knowledge" - E-Stat 16:07:07 06/19/10 (0)
        
        "That does not mean there are no differences, but the scale certainly changes." - robert young 08:15:52 06/19/10 (1)
        
        RE: "That does not mean there are no differences, but the scale certainly changes." - kerr 09:57:59 06/19/10 (0)
        
        "That does not mean there are no differences, but the scale certainly changes. " - E-Stat 08:02:21 06/19/10 (37)
        
        RE: "That does not mean there are no differences, but the scale certainly changes. " - Tony Lauck 11:15:12 06/19/10 (36)
        
        Disagreed - Phelonious Ponk 05:01:04 06/27/10 (2)
        
        RE: Disagreed - Tony Lauck 06:30:40 06/27/10 (1)
        
        RE: Disagreed - Phelonious Ponk 17:15:16 06/27/10 (0)
        
        Agreed - E-Stat 12:20:33 06/19/10 (32)
        
        RE: Agreed - Tony Lauck 12:29:26 06/19/10 (31)
        
        RE: Agreed - Pat D 20:12:40 06/20/10 (24)
        
        RE: Agreed - Tony Lauck 07:22:56 06/21/10 (2)
        
        RE: Agreed - Pat D 12:59:12 06/22/10 (1)
        
        RE: Agreed - Tony Lauck 14:32:01 06/22/10 (0)
        
        No editing, Pat - E-Stat 06:37:36 06/21/10 (20)
        
        So now we're talking of a direct feed . . . - Pat D 08:30:33 06/21/10 (19)
        
        Precisely - E-Stat 08:44:56 06/21/10 (18)
        
        RE: Precisely - Pat D 19:47:43 06/23/10 (17)
        
        Have you ever heard of experience? - E-Stat 06:17:13 06/24/10 (16)
        
        You have a peculiarly truncated notion of experience. - Pat D 09:03:12 06/24/10 (15)
        
        Truncated experience? - E-Stat 10:07:32 06/24/10 (14)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Pat D 10:57:24 06/24/10 (13)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Tony Lauck 13:59:04 06/24/10 (5)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Pat D 17:10:51 06/24/10 (4)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Tony Lauck 17:37:03 06/24/10 (3)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Pat D 18:01:51 06/24/10 (2)
        
        RE: Truncated experience? - Tony Lauck 18:18:20 06/24/10 (1)
        
        The difference of course - E-Stat 18:47:53 06/24/10 (0)
        
        Assumptions, assumptions - E-Stat 12:13:25 06/24/10 (6)
        
        You're making lots of assumptions. - Pat D 16:41:07 06/24/10 (5)
        
        You're just too funny - E-Stat 17:30:11 06/24/10 (4)
        
        RE: You're just too funny - Tony Lauck 18:06:28 06/24/10 (3)
        
        Which ones have you heard... - E-Stat 18:43:21 06/24/10 (2)
        
        RE: Which ones have you heard... - Tony Lauck 19:30:30 06/24/10 (1)
        
        :) - E-Stat 20:38:56 06/24/10 (0)
        
        That begs the obvious question - E-Stat 12:33:43 06/19/10 (5)
        
        Maslow's Hammer? - Tony Lauck 13:34:37 06/19/10 (4)
        
        "Some time ago" - E-Stat 13:50:21 06/19/10 (3)
        
        RE: "Some time ago" - Tony Lauck 14:55:49 06/19/10 (1)
        
        If you recall - E-Stat 16:05:17 06/19/10 (0)
        
        Thanks! - kerr 14:21:26 06/19/10 (0)
- Pure nonsense on so many levels - it's not even worth responding to. N/T - carcass93 08:21:22 06/18/10 (0)
- We have a winner folks! - E-Stat 07:39:16 06/18/10 (0)
- "...some of us actually believe susceptability to external noise signifies a high resolution system" - robert young 04:24:07 06/18/10 (9)
  - Another point of view... - robert young 13:28:55 06/18/10 (0)
  - RE: "...some of us actually believe susceptability to external noise signifies a high resolution system" - rick_m 06:40:48 06/18/10 (7)
    - Not sure you got my point... - robert young 13:23:18 06/18/10 (6)
      - RE: Not sure you got my point... - rick_m 15:23:36 06/18/10 (5)
        
        I'll try again... - robert young 18:17:59 06/18/10 (4)
        
        RE: I'll try again... - rick_m 06:48:26 06/19/10 (3)
        
        Rick, seriously, it is the logic that is flawed...It isn't about cables, or noise, its about a tortured logic. - robert young 08:01:15 06/19/10 (2)
        
        A perfect example is to notice the evolution - E-Stat 12:30:11 06/19/10 (0)
        
        RE: Rick, seriously, it is the logic that is flawed...It isn't about cables, or noise, its about a tortured logic. - rick_m 12:17:03 06/19/10 (0)
- There is a less sinister motive. - rick_m 21:20:25 06/17/10 (0)

Threads started on or before 4/10/07 are archived Here.
Threads started on or before 3/31/07 are archived Here.
Threads started on or before 3/15/07 are archived Here.
Threads started on or before 2/28/07 are archived Here.
Threads started on or before 2/15/07 are archived Here.

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.