mas

Not everyone here is presumed to have a background in physics. Nor should they. But all of the folks taken by various claims are victims of their desire to believe. Quite a few folks here (and elsewhere) don't have an unlimited budget to blow of all sorts of magical bogus treatments - of which the market is seemingly saturated. And I get a bi tired of the typical infomercial end run around accountability by virtue of emotional testimony. Of course a curious fellow might ask why such tactics have become the norm... Others have seen enough of the magic cables, cable stands, bricks, and vaious other accoutremounts where the small issue of physics is notably absent. After a while, a lot of folks get tired of explaining over and over that the world is round. I don't think that you are the target - unless you choose to assume the role. Some here simply don't like to see others unwittingly become the victim. And we have yet to hear a coherant explanation of why and how they work. But we can certainly posit a case against them.

Yup, all I offered was jokes- - although they are warranted! (and I thank you for your erroneous overly simplified misrepresentation - so i guess I should lay on the floor and cry) And the effect of stands are easily determined based upon physical concepts as well. And to think - neither decoupling nor stands are beyond the reach of physics... And both are rather easily understood. And if you specify the spacing from the floor we can even calculate the frequency at which the bass will cease to couple and where the Q and polar lobing increase. They are great if you think the bass is overexaggerated and you like a lower frequency where polar anomalies become predominant. Go figure.

Goosh! With reasoning like that. how can anyone doubt the validity of decoupling speakers - assuming they actually achieve effective decoupling! (Especially as a couple of pucks of Sorbothane would be more effective and cheaper.) I'm convinced! ...But not about rollerblocks.

I'll tell you what (how is that for sounding Southern!?)... Speaking as a transplanted Yankee (hey, try as one might, you never quite shake that pejorative!)... Anyone stupid enough to buy into stereotypes severely underestimates the resourcefulness of a few 'Good ol' Boys'. (...of course now is when someone digs out pictures of Lester Maddox riding his bicycle backwards...) [*-)]

Generally speaking... There are few instances where multiple drivers offer an advantage if the job can be done with one. In fact, it is just the opposite. Multiple drivers introduce many problems that you will not be able to remove or successfully mitigate. And I sure wish that the notion of the MTM/ "D'Appollito' configuration being a superior center speaker config would disappear! - especially as it is commonly laid on its side! [*-)] It's indeed common, but a significant trade off. (How's that for kicking the proverbial hornet's nest?) [] []

Hmmm. So we see the power of belief versus the power of reasoning. Have you personally circumnavigated the Earth? Do you know for a FACT that the world is round? While belief is indeed a formidible force, I would suggest that a bit of reasoning with regards to physics provides a bit more of a positive return on the investment... OK, let's take a look at a few elements of the system described: Coupled with spikes/tiptoes Source of vibration: Speaker itself – internally generated vibration Other speaker via radiative transmission - (damped via coupling) Surface via conductive transmission – lower damped rate than of speaker itself Vibration of cabinet internally generated in addition to radiative coupling damped by rigid coupling to lower rate of vibration of the coupled surface – lower group delay => sounds worse (?) De-coupled with Rollerballs Source of vibration: Speaker itself – internally generated vibration Other speaker via radiative transmission – (undamped via de-coupling) Vibration of cabinet internally generated in addition to radiative coupling – increased group delay => sounds better (?) So we have testimonies of those who initially claimed that tight coupling and infinitesimally small improved group delay improved the sound. Now this same source claims that de-coupling and allowing the enclosure and drivers to be vibrated by internal and radiative sources with increased group delay to sound better! And all of this in addition to the fact that the internal volume of the cabinet functions as a Helmholtz resonator of varying efficiency driven by all of the various sources, thus reinforcing the tuned frequency. To the degree that one might employ the logic to make a case, tightly coupling the cabinet to a surface exhibiting either (ideally) no or less conductive vibration should result in an infinitesimal improvement. But such an improvement is negligible compared to the orders of magnitude greater differences that can be easily effected via other means, including signal alignment. Decoupling the cabinet only serves to reduce the damping effect of a coupled surface of a surface exhibiting a lower rate of vibration – thus resulting in a less damped total system and higher group delay. And there is absolutely NO basis whatever for the concept of higher group delay improving sound! Sorry... So....what mystical force or energy is at play here? Or are these fancy devices better distributed via an ecclesiastical supply house? I'm sorry, but faith and belief, while useful in some realms, have little impact upon the physics of sound. [] I could certainly use a beer...

What I like about your posts is that you stick to your opinion of why the industry has done things despite myriad industry sources who disagree with you! But belief is a powerful thing! As they said, the major defection that tipped the market was Warner Bros. And reading about why they consolidated to one format was largely due to their yearly plummet in profits. Thus with declining DVD sales they decided to cut their duplicate production and supply chain management costs by consolidating on one format. With NetFlix and Blockbuster already having done the same thing by moving to BluRay, Warner also chose to maximize their exposure while minimizing their costs. Subsequently WalMart and others have chosen to do the same thing as by reducing their product mix to one format, they have the option to reduce their SCM costs while not effecting sales. And the sales are not effected, as the net sales will remain approximately the same. As regardles of the product mix between BR and HD-DVD, the same title is only bought once per customer/household. It is a zero sum game. Multiple formats only increased operational costs and reduced opportunity without selling more product. Maybe this is not clear. But to provide an example, only one copy of a particular title is generally purchased, regardless of whatever format it may be. But with each format supported, inventory costs, processing costs, shipping costs, labor, allocated floor space, etc. is duplicated without incurring an increase in sales. Byreducing the number of formats available, the sales remain the same while the associated supply chain management costs as well as carried inventory and opportunity costs are reduced. Thus their costs are reduced relative to their realized income. Their interests are served by reducing duplicate formats for any given title UNLESS sales are at least doubled with people buying one in each format. And no media product currently enjoys such a market position. HD media is a niche product at BEST. Before and still, with no indication at present of that changing - especially as Sony is still in a state of flux in not having yet released a machine that meets its roadmap for what was to be its first generation machine! And that (profile 2) is not even expected to hit the market until October 2008 - something that if it does actually arrive on time (something Sony has not come close to doing withanything related to BluRay) will be a first. So even with a format victory, they are still treading water at present! And the ONLY unit that even begins to make sense to buy is the PS3! All that has been settled is which format will dominate the HD niche. To date HD media, like DVD-A and SACD before it in the audio market, has NOT significantly effected the overall media market. If it will remains to be seen.

Travis, This will quickly degenerate in to the duality of particle/wave - of wavicles. And we quickly descend in to quagmire that existed prior to quantum. Classical models quickly break down and become meaningless once we approach near massless 'things' moving near the speed of light. And persisting in holding onto such concepts is not of benefit. Nor is it easily understood in non-mathematical terms, as we enter a world defined by non-linear probablility. We again enter into the seemingly mutually exclusive world of quantum, where the quantum model litereally seems to contradict the classical models and where what we have generally considered common sense in a material world breaks down and becomes anything but. That is the source of the terms "quantum leap" - as the 'rules' break down and must be replaced with new rules that violate our common assumptions. If one wants a 'simple' non-mathematical explanation of electrons and their interactions, may I suggest Feynman's QED, perhaps the best 150 pages in modern science. And discover why the characterisitic terms that dominate quantum are drawn from sources such as Alice and Wonderland and why 'strangeness' is a legitimate trait. But sitting on the edge of the classical model and quantum and trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together is not a fruitful (nor a fun) endeavor. ...And why Sir Arthur Eddington's comment on Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle: "Something unknown is doing something we know not what" is both accurate and insightful - despite its sounding utterly fantastic. What is frustrating is that so many still want to debate the concepts introduced by quantum almost 100 years ago. Wire is pretty simple for the frequencies we which we deal. Buy copper wire with the least resistance feasible with the least reactance. The wire tables provide a good guide for gauge vs length. Its a simple as you choose to make it.

Bash you? Huh? You challenge me on how many classes and I simply responded with degrees. Since I "threw it in"? LOL! After you initiated the peeing contest why? Civil indeed. And IEEE in college? I wasn't talking of a student chapter. And yet again, we run into another situation where we are supposed to lead with our resume before a statement can have credence. Yawn. [|-)] And all because we had the audacity to wander so far out onto the ledge to question the classical model of electricity. ...Talk about living on the edge! LOL! I can't believe that this is even an issue! You evidently missed the analogy between electrical fields and acoustic energy and the distinction between energy and what is commonly assumed in simplistic cartoon conceptions to constitute the energy. And why do you have a ground rod? Simply put...safety! A ground is NOT a necessary pre-requisite for a circuit! And electromigration is not a phenomena that effects systems by attrition. A fuse yes. And it occurs in larger crystaline structures as well! And Ohm's law isn't violated - to the degree that is applicable. Look, here is the fundamental problem. You are persisting in using classical models in a valiant but fundamentally flawed attempt to explain quantum phenomena. While convenient, they are not accurate. And I can't believe that we have to address this fact yet again on this site. You want to compare degrees. OK, if you want. Start with 2 degrees in physics, where everything after sophomore physics was ALL quantum sourced. And in graduate school we were quantum slave labor... Ohm's 'law' was left far behind in sophomore circuits where the electrons are 'things' that hold hands and all skip down the wire...And 2 degrees in Comp Engr. and an MS in CE-Info Assurance..as well as tenure at IBM developing internals for the RS6000SP and PSSP. Examples of the 'little box' that some might recognize as ASCI White and Blue Gene. Oh, and the unit that Intel develops on as well.(and they use exotic copper and aluminum interconnects - where bit error raqtes are critical. ...And lots of other stuff in directed R&D for DOE as a principal developing new state of the art methods in resonance ionization spectroscopy that actually directly resulted in the resolution sufficient to succesfully identify of one atom. I think we even ha cause to deal just a bit with those 'things' called electrons. And all of this is necessary(???) to say that all you have to do is worry about minimizing resistance (and reactance to the degree possible) in interconnects. Yup, those degrees were sure worthwhile.[*-)] And as far as your claiming that "(I) keep referring to this guys website. " I listed the url and suggested you read it. That's it. He has some good points regarding the problems with taking the classical models too far. Not by virtue that its on the web, but by virtue of understanding the material. He points out lots of the inconsistencies that may not be readily apparent. Is he the last word? My goodness no! But if you understood what was going on in SS physics you should realize that the notion of electron 'particles' jumping frm atom to atom is not all there is to 'electricity' and certainly not to EM fields and electrical energy! Limited to that understanding, its a miracle that we were able to move beyond the incandescent light bulb. And according to that notion, magnetism must really be confusing. But you might just want to focus on the difference between rates of electron flow measured in inches per minute and the velocity of electrical energy 'near' light speed. And you might want to jettison the old notion of electrons as being 'things' carried over from the obsolete Bohr model. So what moves now? Or do we get to listen to the cloud theory of electrical current. And why do we have to listen to the 'paqrticle theory at all? Why not the wave theory? Descriptive convenience doesn't necessarily infer accuracy. Especially when they seem mutually exclusive! You see, in the past we have refered to many websites and sources. Be it Nelson Pass' 'real world' tests to many others. But the point is, while you may be new to this discussion, esoteric discussions about wire are about the last thing that many of us want to discuss again and again and again...and again. These perenniel excursions into absurdity are not only a waste of time, but we have been there 100s of times. ..only to listen to the next guy show up with some astounding 'new' discovery consisting of some new marketing brochure. And go ahead and make a website that says I didn't pay my IEEE dues. I won't argue, as I am going to let it lapse after $2500+ for the basic IEEE plus a like sum for the Computer society utterly wasted. Case in point. It would have been better spent on exotic cable. And you don't even get a card whose type doesn't migrate to the plastic sleeve in your wallet. You don't need to debate me. I get very bored with this topic pretty easily anyway. Put down your classical model circuits books and find a quality quantum based text. Like Bohr's model, the cartoon image of electrons as particles traveling down the wire goes down in flames. Quaint, easily to imagine. Yes. Accurate? No. And sitting on the edge of the classical /quantum models and debating which is accurate is moving backwards. And mixing the two in an attempt at greater further understanding is not productive. And it certainly does not reflect an understanding of what quantum has to teach! And any class in quantum should have made his fact readily apparent, even if not well understood. But when all is said and done, for speaker wire, your primary consideration is resistance. Less is more. Period. And with luck, you find wire with low reactance. And exotic wire offers little advantage in either. In fact, the differences in most exotic cable is an increased variance in reactance that results in a perceptual difference. But I spend less specifically to avoid exactly that! But feel free to make it as complex as you imagine. And buy whatever you like. Just don't be surprised if many of us don't 'buy it'. And even more of us are tired of such a stimulating topic. Just buy the cheapest appropriate guage copper cable. And if it turns green you can easily afford to clean the contacts or replace it. Especially as you will only notice it via visual inspection and not by sonics... Unless cleaning contacts once a year is too complex - and then you can always 'move up' to the higher resistance of gold! [*-)]

Gee whiz, so since sound travels at 1130 feet per second, it simply follows that air molecules are traveling at the same velocity. Right? Wrong. So it is with electron flow... By your logic, I would avoid sitting front of your speakers. And who do we sue for initiating multiple Hurrican Katrinas in our cars and listening rooms. And no wonder iPods can cause hearing loss! And just what happens to all of those 'extra' electrons in a DC circuit when they all reach the load? So the load just can't hold any more... And electrons are not EM fields. And EM fields are not comprised of electron clouds.Just as sound energy is not constituted by air molecules.And then you might want to explain AC by virtue of your notion of electron travel as they don't 'travel' at all. And you should be intimate with the concept of electromigration, as it is the MAJOR source of chip failure. And since you mention it, how many EM theory classes have I taken? I have you trumped in the subject area by an additional 3 degrees. Plus I have paid IEEE far too much money for a worthless magazine and chapter meetings of interest only to those with an interest in power transmission. And how many courses in quantum mechanics/electrodynamcs and solid state physics have you taken? Not trying to be flip, but therin the classical models all get tossed where they belong. And therein lies the source of the misconception.[]

It's easy to figure out. You sell one Porsche GT3 to a niche market for every couple of million+ Corollas sold to the mass market. No one is debating the fact that a very small niche can find a use for something. But the MASS MARKET is that of MUCH greater concern to both the studios and the public, and this is the real focus of an industry that is a business first and foremost. A fact that the fanboys and those promoting characteristics is interest only to the niche market consistently miss. That was and remains the primary point. Niche needs don't drive the mass market.

Buck, retailers are not stuck with it. They simply return it to he distributor who returns it to the 'record' company. What they chose to do with it afterwards is up to them. There is no guarantee that they will discount anything - especially as they figure that they will simply sell a copy of the same product in another format. There is no need to undercut themselves, as they market the same product in all formats. Sure they will. The studios are simply going to release all of their heretofore 'only HD DVD' material on BluRay now. The only downside to having invested in HD-DVD is that now these people will have to buy another BluRay player. And it seems to me that the only smart BluRay buy is to simply get a PS3 system. The notion that the capacity has had an impact is moot. It may sound good on paper, but it has no practical impact in the market as it exists. That's like saying that Porsche GT3s will dominate the market because they go faster than Toyota Corollas. There are no viable BluRay burners that have had ANY impact on the market. So essentially no one is buying it to record greater capacity. Additionally, there are cheaper eways to do that. BluRay has been bypassed in the IT world. And anyone buying pre-recorded content doesn't care if they could fit the space shuttle on the disk - its a moot discussion. And the notion that standard DVDs look bad is simply nonsense. And upscaled DVDs look fine as well. The problem with HD is that while it is higher resolution, there is little compelling reason to move to it. I don't care if I can see if a running back has shaved. Its meaningless to what I want to see if I watch sports on TV. Heck, I would be happietr if they simply pulled back in the field of view and let me see the defensive backfields (that a resonable person could almost make a case that they don't even take the field on half of the plays based upon what you see!). Nor does seeing the tattoos on some woman on Jerry Springer more clearly provide a compelling reason to upgrade - especially when upconvertng DVD players do it for $50 and require no additional expense for commodity priced DVDs. The notion that you need to see everything in HD is akin to listening to Ted Turner announce that they had to colorize the old B&W films INTENTIONALLY shot in B&W! The fact remains that the move to HD has not been driven by market demand. And for the majority of programming, SD is just fine. Especially as so many were so happy with it before the advent of HD. And the only thing driving so many to buy new TVs is not HD, but the need to replace their analog sets that were just fine as the govt wanted to reallocate and sell the spectrum. I never heard anyone saying - "wow, existing video standards are terrible".

I just came back from stopping by WalMart and Virgin and spoke with a manager at both regarding their intent (or not) to discount the HD-DVD software - and was informed at both that in their meetings they were told they would not be discounting t media. both said that their heretofore sales of HD-DVD media had beed pretty good, so they were going to hold onto it at regular price and simply return what will utimately become cutouts to the distributor. In fact they raqther anticipate those who own HD-DVD players to try to gather as many as they can before they become unavailable. Unless things change or if you can find an exception, there will be no firesale. And no price cutting by Sony either!

Nope! And Marshall - what I was referring to is the continuing misunderstanding of the notion of current, electricity, electron movement, etc - where not only are the terms misused, but the concepts very poorly understood. (But of which I know you are aware as we have talked about this before!) A great site that attempts to address this - and is WELL worth wading through - is http://amasci.com/miscon/energ1.html Check it out. And the confusion is much more extensive than you might think... Electrons do not flow at the speed of light in a wire. The velocity of electrons is on the order of inches per minute! The overly simplistic notion that all current consists of electrons that flow only about the surface (eg the skin effect) is not correct. Sure there is a skin effect, but the notion that this plasma layer and EM field are composed of 'flowing' electrons - as it seems many erroneously think (and which has been so utterly misrepresented by Monster market BS) - is a crass and erroneous oversimplification. And even if one wanted to make a case for this in a DC circuit, it wouldn't make sense in an AC circuit. In other words, the conventially held model is incorrect - and EM fields are not comprised of electrons - and using it to rationalize more behavior is simply adding to the confusion. And SO MUCH MORE! And we won't even get close to discussing such phenomena as electromigration - which has been a reliability headache for years - where current 'pushes' the atoms in small wires out of place and creates voids that can break te interconnect wires on an integrated circuit - resulting in IC failure. The nature of this topic goes far beyond the space we have here - and will upset so many notions that it will make the introduction of the time domain look routine! So, instead of listening to me, wade through the referenced web sites and links and please put aside your old classical notions as he tries to knock you up side the head sufficiently to jog the old ideas as if they were a victim of electromigration - at least enough to allow some new ways of imagining the nature of electricity, current , charge and energy flow to become better understood. Please, as the classic debates here regarding how 'signal' flows through wires along with electrons is simply nonsense. How's that for being blunt? []

I don't mean to belabor the point, but sales do not in any way mean "the best". Allot of "clappers" and Chia Pets are sold too. [] And there are MANY artists who are much better. This year, last year and next. But if you like her stuff, that's all that matters. It has been interesting to watch the various label's 'stables', and to watch them cannibalize other artist's songs (yes, often songs that are literally theirs!) in order to feed and support the top 2 annointed "products". And unfortunately it is too often at the expense of a much more talented artist - but one which does not fit the preferred formula. There is actually lots of VERY good music available. The problem is that you have to scavenge it on your own, as the mainstream sources for learning about it have become dominated by companies pushing out of date copycat formula acts that have ceased to have a connection with the market.

"Consumers spent [only] about $170 million on high-def DVD in 2007 and Fox, for one, is hoping that jumps to $10 billion in 2008," I've read some pretty unrealistic things in the past , but this comment just might be the most unrealistic yet! "I think the better question is "Now that the format war is over, how are the BR folks going to convince the mass market to adopt?" "

Analysts: Studios will gain from HD DVD's exit, but consumers' won't By J Emigh, BetaNews February 20, 2008, 1:39 PM http://www.betanews.com/article/Analysts_Studios_will_gain_from_HD_DVDs_exit_but_consumers_wont/1203532784 Consumers would really have been better off right now with Toshiba's HD DVD format for high definition video than with Sony's Blu-ray approach, a principal analyst at ABI Research told BetaNews today. Big film studios will gain from Toshiba's exit from the high definition (HD) disk market, although not as much as they'd like -- and consumers won't benefit at all, at least initially, according to analysts at market research firm ABI Research. The format battle between Toshiba's HD DVD format and Sony's Blu-ray approach was causing major problems for 20th Century-Fox, Warner Bros., and other movie studios, noted ABI Principal Analyst Steve Wilson. "Consumers spent [only] about $170 million on high-def DVD in 2007 and Fox, for one, is hoping that jumps to $10 billion in 2008," Wilson said, in a Q&A today with BetaNews. Still, even industry standardization around Blu-ray won't boost sales as much as the movie studios want. "They'll be lucky if they get to two-thirds [of the $10 billion]," the analyst remarked. Wilson also suggested that consumers would really have been better off with the HD format than with Blu-ray. "Storage capacity is the one area [where Blu-ray] can claim an advantage," he elaborated. But the outcome of the format war, which became official on Tuesday, "doesn't benefit anyone today and it comes at a cost. [blu-ray] discs and players are both more expensive to manufacture. The DVD format was less expensive to implement and further along in its deployment. [blu-ray] is twelve months behind in terms of its feature set." To wrap a bit of historical perspective around the reactions of ABI and other observers, only a year or two ago, a lot of people would have been quite surprised by any notion that Blu-ray would prevail over HD. Back then, an independent market research group called Cymfony analyzed postings on message boards, blogs, and other Web pages to gauge the opinions of early adopters of blue-laser consoles, mainly among gamers and videophiles. "Positive discussions about HD DVD are 46 percent higher than for Blu-ray, with over twice as many post authors being 'impressed with HD DVD' as 'impressed with Blu-ray,'" according to the results. (PDF available as an attachment above) which covered the period between October 1 and November 23, 2006. Cymfony describes itself as "a market influence analytics company that sifts and interprets the millions of voices at the intersection of traditional and social media." The Cymfony researchers further found that Sony and its Blu-ray format suffered from a "credibility gap" due to Sony's past failures with technologies such as Betamax and MiniDisc. In addition, gamers at the time were found to have been unhappy that the PS3 console comes with a Blu-ray player. "Beyond the increased cost, they objected to Sony giving them no choice," according to the report. Ironically, based on their analysis of the Internet content studied, the Cymfony researchers posited "strong dislike for Blu-ray" as the the main reason why users have been hesitant to adopt HD drives. "Mainstream media focus on the high cost of Blu-ray and the 'format war' as reasons consumers may be slow to embrace high definition video. But these aren't the biggest reasons currently discussed in social media," according to the study. "Post authors express a general dislike for Blu-ray, often based on doubt regarding Sony's credibility as a technology innovator and ability to succeed with a new platform." In fairness, Blu-ray did suffer from some technical issues in 2006 that no longer exist. Most notably, studios have weaned themselves from MPEG-2 compression, which was often visibly noticeable and not nearly as efficient as H.264-based codecs such as MPEG-4. As a result, the first BD discs couldn't take full advantage of the huge space allotted for them. And the first BD discs off the block suffered from film transfer problems that early adopters initially attributed to faults with the format rather than the process. Plus, early Blu-ray players suffered from bugs with noise cancellation and other features, resulting in disgruntled customers. But that anger became very public, thanks to the Internet, and it was that anger that may have helped taint the second wave of adopters -- those contacted by the Cymfony study. In the end, though, it wasn't customers' likes or dislikes that powered the fatal blow in the format war, according to ABI. It was Warner Bros.' decision to switch allegiance to Blu-ray, along with subsequent moves to dump HD by major retailers such as Wal-Mart, Netflix and Blockbuster, that served as the key catalysts in the rather sudden industry migration to Blu-ray. "Consumer spending on DVD sales and rentals was pretty flat in 2005 and 2006 at about $22 billion. It dropped last year for the first time, by about 3 percent," Wilson said today. "The studios really need the new high-def format to catch on so they can drive revenues back up," the ABI analyst told BetaNews. Blu-rayHDStudy.pdf

Music is a great tool for inducing and reinforcing reflection based melancholia. There are a few that can bring me 'up'...Ironically the best music for bringing me 'up' is the music of Sisters of Mercy (Eldridge rocks!) or Jim Carroll's Catholic Boy - with anything but up lyrics. OK, exceptions are Little Feat and Wang Chung who can do it too...with upbeat and quirky lyrics...

So Carrie Underwood is genuinely the BEST female vocalist in country music? Not even in your most wildly optimistic dreams! But leave it to an industry whose myriad self and mutual admiration awards shows are solely for the purpose of further merchandizing and selling product. Compare the best of anything Carrie has done to the worst thing that KDLang or Emmylou Harris and Carrie is still light years behind. And it is an indication of exactly why what is called "country" music - the same nonsense that Alan Jackson lamented as being largely 70's retread pop songs (My Maria 'by' Brooks and Dunne being a prime example for the folks soooooo aware of the BWStevenson song - of which Shambhala is the flip side and the EXACT same song with different lyrics!) was also a hit by 3 Dog Night! - has been plumeting in ratings for the past 10 years. Of course most of the rest are Lefty Frizell drawl imitators (cause you simply got to tawk that way if you want to sang cuntry) and why inside the industry these 'formula' artists are 'lovingly' referred to as "hat" and the ever endearling "ROPS" (regular ol' piece of...) acts... If Carrie Underwood is indeed the state of the art in country, its long past time to bury that format, as the stench has simply grown unbearable. Truth be known, there is a wealth of real talent out there, but you won't hear it on the radio - nor is it featured in the awards shows who only feature what is marketed. And the ONLY thing currently worth listening to in 'country' is the Americana format and 'alt country'. And its pretty sad when the most interesting thing about Clay Aiken isn't his music but his sexuality! [*-)] And he doesn't want to talk about that. Sure makes the entire topic simple for me.

Copper corrodes. I would be willing to bet that, except to the degree that corrosion between the conductive surfaces of the connectors can act as an insulator, the net resistance doesn't change much at all. (And its time that the cartoon inspired notion that current flows by virtue of electron 'flow' and not by magnetic field 'charge' should die the death it so rightly (or 'wrongly') deserves. But then that tired notion comes each time the length of cable issue is raised!) Neither Monster, Home Depot, or any of the other myriad companies have developed a copper that is better than copper. And yes, I have some Monster sourced cable that has turned green and the net resistance hasn't been affected. But then I couldn't care less who sourced it. Its not a Monster issue, its a copper issue. And before anyone start touting other materials, silver corrodes even more readily and gold is a relatively lousy conductor. So if you have concerns, once or twice a year clean the contacts and wire ends and if you are really industriuos, reat them with Cramolin or DeOxit or whatever they are calling it this week. But this topic has lasted far longer than is justified.

Forward Air containerized shipping. http://www.forwardair.com/

I suggest that we have exhausted our 'guesses' and its time for a legitimate servce center to look at the system, and not simply individual components. Of course you could take the interconnects in and ask them to assess why the protection cercuit comes on as well. And while we might laugh at that at that notion, that is exactly what we have been in effect doing for the past several pages. Good luck.

Buck.... Of course I'm yankin' your chain! [] And I happen to agree with you...at least in one respect! (Yikes! Now that IS scary!)[] Folks seem to vote for personalities rather than to understand the role of President as a gatre keeper, who either rubber stamps of vetoes bills. And while many complained so loudly about gridlock, with a President from one party and a Congress of another, it insured that the simpe majority could not run their nonsense through the Congress resulting in what we have now. Instead, the President would veto simple partisan majority whims which forced a bill to assemble 2/3 majority status to pass - meaning that it had to at least have the merit to engender bi-partisan support. Thus only bills which could do this succeeded. And I suggest that we are all better off due to this. And this is exactly what resulted in many of the gains in the 90's. Gridlock really isn't so bad. The even scarier aspect of what you speak is that so many of those who will vote will vote for whomever seems to promise the most wonderful 'free' stuff that will mystically fall from the sky into each person's lap instead of the person who will suggest real measures that address real problems that may require a few less 'free' gifts and a little more discipline and responsibility. In that sense we aren't that much different than watching a Carribean Island elect someone like a Papa or Baby Doc who promises not one, but 3 chickens in every pot and a new car despite the country not having the resources to find a single chicken. Here we have a generation of boomers ready to retire without adequate resources who will be demanding the government provide more, not less services. And we are upside down with the number of folks demanding more services compared to the number who are paying into the system. Nevertheless the mantra and the voting blocks will result in increased calls and demands for services and simply pushing the costs forward - just like we did with 'prescription health care reform' in the last Congess - with an unfunded prescription care mandate that literally increased the already existing unfunded mandate 'crisis' constituted largely by SocSecurity from $3T to $8T....yet the cries of many are that they did not go far enough (while we continue to focus on Soc. Security as if it is 'the' crisis). And I suspect that trend has only begun. So folks have an even bigger responsibility now. They can vote for whomever promises you the most (and for which presumably someone else will pay!) Or they can vote for someone who advocates making the hard fundamental choices. Now all we have to do is find someone who advocates the hard fundamental choices! And does anyone know any citizen statesman for whom politics is not simply a lucrative career where they enter without even owning a house and exit multi-millionaires? Here is where I will agree with your complaint that Big Money does change things - and not for the better. And I lament the seeming dearth of folks for whom character is a larger issue than simply the power and money to be made. []

OK, I think I am getting the hang of this. So, if i have it right: It is our responsibility to vote for tha particular group of monied special interests, inwhich only the rich can play, who will impose their interests upon us. And that is what makes being FREE American citizen so great?[*-)] I am beginning to think that your original rant against professional interests versus amatuer participants isn't so bad...as your 'responsibility', as it exists, certainly doesn't seem nearly as attractive as we vote our choice between two groups of special interests, neither of which are grounded in statesmanship ... [] I mean, for an example you only have to go as far as to stop and take a look at our state of 'education reform' - a failed oxymoron where a person with a BS, MS or PhD in say, math or engineering is not considered qualified to teach a rigorous' curriculum such as 7th grade math or science, despite the lack of qualified math and science teachers being called a "critical" shortage in "No Child Left Behind" - simply because they have a liberal arts degree rather than a degree from the college of education which requires far fewer courses in math &/or science. Thank both those represent the Teacher's Union that is afraid of the competition and the powers that be who have capitulated to such demands.

But Buck!....I'm surprised at you! [] Everyone knows that politics is a big business dominated by the moneyed few instead of the citizen statesman. So, why should we pay any more attention to politics than you do Nascar? ...Except to gripe about it? []