jazman Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 ---------------- On 6/18/2004 6:11:10 PM AK-4 wrote: Edmond, Tubinlover is not Paul. Mark, I think Edmond wanted you to see the nice layout and quality Parts: Cerafine electrolyics, Jensen copper PIOs and MIT 10 section MultiCaps. Pricey parts. I think I've learned that the more filtering the better. Load 'em up. ---------------- Dean, It seems not even you can keep up with your buddy's multiple personalities. Remeber, he switched from "tubinlover" to "tubelover". Your gaff gives him away again. And yes, I was pointing out the growth available with separates using quality parts replacing the standard parts to extract a higher level of performance. Seperates also allow changing the line stage without throwing out the phono stage. Fexibility and performance possibilities "normally" not available in a single box. It goes beyond just the LOMC issue. Klipsch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 Question: Why is it whenever Jazman posts, regardless of topic, someone immediately feels the need to attack him? I don't know Jazman but find he is usually trying to provide an alternative discussion point or simply provide options and does so without using provocative language. Immediately he is assaulted and his opinion disparaged. Have his attackers nothing better to do? More importantly, why doesn't Amy just reread the threads and ban the individuals who do this on a consistent, non-stop basis. Perhaps I will do her homework for her in this case because it is annoying as hell. My apologies Jazman if you are offended I would appear to be a defender. Mark, what I got from Jazmans post on the Cornet (because I have read hundreds of posts) is people buy this as a starting point and then proceed to improve it dramatically though fairly expensive upgrades. I sourced the standard Cornet at $254. I have observed, and believe this shot to be of one example, posts from people who have spend upwards of $500 in caps, resisters, and other stuff of which I have no understanding performing upgrades on this design. Many compare it (with upgrades) to phono stages costing thousands of dollars in quality. Perhaps he was seeking to get your opinion of the circuit with all those high dollar upgrades in it? Then again, I could be completely offbase and he was just providing a photo. Damn. Dean gets in first. Jazman confirms his point. C'mon guys it takes me a while to compose a post. Stop stealing all my glory. Jazman, I am not certain, but I don't think Dean would cover for Paul if it were him. If Paul is using tub* Dean probably doesn't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 I think she started out tubinhard, then tubinlover, then tubelover. I think she should go with tubinhardofhearing. Trust me, it's not Paul. He just enjoys being himself. I understand your point -- I've been following the thread. However, I understand Mark's point as well. If I had more recent and valuable experience with vinyl I could give an opinion -- but I have neither. Are you using a low output moving coil? Don't they still make nice step up transformers for those using units providing only MM? Just curious, as I had a couple of friends that did that back in the 70's and it sounded really good. I heard the phono section of the Blueberry in Indianapolis -- I thought it sounded very good under the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 just buy one of these: http://buy.audiogon.com/cgia/fsb.pl?preaphon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 Great minds think alike. I think I will now go out and shoot myself. Now Anarchist, if you keep that up I'm going to have to give you my other moniker -- "Mother Hen". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 You are right Dean. Defending two people in one post. I must be ill. I just call them the way I see them. Wouldn't be able to shoot yourself if we had reasonable gun laws in this country. Edit: Hold on a minute. I remember the tub* identity claiming it was a female. You invited Paul over to a shower the other day. The parrot thing... Hmmm. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 ---------------- On 6/18/2004 6:34:24 PM Anarchist wrote: Question: Why is it whenever Jazman posts, regardless of topic, someone immediately feels the need to attack him? I don't know Jazman but find he is usually trying to provide an alternative discussion point or simply provide options and does so without using provocative language. Immediately he is assaulted and his opinion disparaged. Have his attackers nothing better to do? More importantly, why doesn't Amy just reread the threads and ban the individuals who do this on a consistent, non-stop basis. Perhaps I will do her homework for her in this case because it is annoying as hell. My apologies Jazman if you are offended I would appear to be a defender. . . . Jazman, I am not certain, but I don't think Dean would cover for Paul if it were him. If Paul is using tub* Dean probably doesn't know. ---------------- Whew! Where to begin. Tubelover did not attack Jazman. She apparently was just annoyed by Jazman always arguing against Mark's posts. Anarchist, show me where Tubelover "assaulted" Jazman and disparaged his opinion. The only one who was attacked here was me, and, amazingly enough, for a post by Tubelover! Anarchist, what do you make of Jazman's comments: "usual ineptitude with regard to reading comprehension. You can cover your post with a shill login, but your lack of class and dogma remains as more than evident where this originates." And "Mr. Parrot, may I suggest you see someone professionally about your female persona which continues to surface." It would seem to me that you are hypersensitive to anyone disagreeing with Jazman, and completely deaf dumb and blind when it comes to Jazman's standard hate-filled comments towards me. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 Where do I start Paul? I need not explain the attack on Jazman. I will the one on you. This is of course from an outside observers standpoint; Jazman has been attacked so frequently and for such a long period of time, he immediately responds when provoked and may have become a bit paranoid. Understandable in my opinion. It is also understand he would believe any 'new' persona might be you because the MO was the same. Yes, he slammed you. Turnabout is fair play. He may now slam me if he feels that was a slam against him. Sorry if the paranoid bit offended you Jazman. I call 'em like I see 'em. If it weren't for the moderator, who apparently came at someone's request, I wouldn't say a thing. You two could go at it as hard and as long as you wanted to. If we are going to have a moderator and she is going to chastise, I want her to know the whole story. Paul, please recognize one thing. You and Jazman. You and Allan Songer. You and Mobile Homeless. You and ... Notice anything in common? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 "Paul, please recognize one thing. You and Jazman. You and Allan Songer. You and Mobile Homeless. You and ... Notice anything in common?" I did get a chuckle out of that one. c&s PS, shouldn't Amy be banning passive aggressive and not so passive aggressive comments tossed into some of these posts as asides, seems like some are the kinds of insults we hired her to edit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 ---------------- On 6/18/2004 6:53:39 PM paulparrot wrote: Whew! Where to begin. Tubelover did not attack Jazman. She apparently was just annoyed by Jazman always arguing against Mark's posts. Anarchist, show me where Tubelover "assaulted" Jazman and disparaged his opinion. The only one who was attacked here was me, and, amazingly enough, for a post by Tubelover! Anarchist, what do you make of Jazman's comments: "usual ineptitude with regard to reading comprehension. You can cover your post with a shill login, but your lack of class and dogma remains as more than evident where this originates." And "Mr. Parrot, may I suggest you see someone professionally about your female persona which continues to surface." It would seem to me that you are hypersensitive to anyone disagreeing with Jazman, and completely deaf dumb and blind when it comes to Jazman's standard hate-filled comments towards me. Go figure. ---------------- Mr. Parrot, You seem to know so much about Ms Tubelover and her intentions. How can that be? I am apparently not allowed to disagree, or state an opinion contrary to Marks? Hmmmm? Again you use the word "hate". Another recurring theme of yours. All of your recurring themes are now into play. Are you happy now? Go figure. Klipsch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 problem is, everything is ultimately political, now more than ever. the air you breath, the water you drink, its all political. goods, money, loudspeakers, music, its all political. science, physics, nature....all political. the way you think, write, talk, even walk or dance....all political. to deny this is political. unfortunately these days "denial" is very political (and popular I might add). to censor or not to censor, to capitalize or not capitalize, also political. to not acknowledge that the problems of our little forum here are a reflection of what is boiling over in our polarized society, is political. get it? where is fini (the retired carpenter) you ask, hmmmmm ...I guess humor, you guessed it....connected to political...... in previous days when heated arguments were rampant here and insults were hurled, we all survived none the less, sure maybe someone took a vacation for a few weeks to hide out for awhile, so be it, the place worked, there was freedom, creativity, storms, drama, interest, entertainment, and education. The current socalled need to "moderate" is nothing if no political. It will work about as good as the war on drugs, or the war on evil. Then again, now that I think of it, the quality of the insults between the giants in earlier days was a lot more classy, it has taken a decided turn toward the lowbrow these days. Probably not the best thling for Klipsch business interests. So never mind, all that stuff I just said.... then again.... C&S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 C&S, You nailed it on the head. We used to see lively debate and in the course of that debate often saw some wonderful wit and subtle jabs between the combatants. Sometimes they were not so subtle but they were not just low brow insults. If someone resulted to a low brow insult, the other persons jab was even funnier. Does anyone recall an exchange between NOS and MH one time where you pretty much needed to resort to looking up each of the persons listed in MH's reply in order to even understand what he had just said to NOS. It was brilliant, effective, and yes, funnier than hell... once you knew what he was even saying. Regarding Jazman and Mark; do you guys realize you aren't even debating or do you just want to make certain each of your points are understood? Jazman says separates provide ability to mix and match without paying for something you don't want and the ability to upgrade over the phono stage if it were integrated. Mark says separates provide flexibility but do not provide an inherent sound advantage over what could be achieved with an integrated and do not offer the cost advantage of integrateds. The points are not exclusionary. All are true statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 This perpetual complaining about the state of the Forum is getting old. Reminds me of junior high students whining about school rules. C&S: Amy has made it clear repeatedly that politics is not welcome here. Your insistence on bringing it up all the time, albeit now in a philosophical way, shows a lack of respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 You know the biggest Joke of the Indy weekend was calling poor old Paul tubelover, tubinlover, tubinhard, FLklipster and on and on. Some people are so far off in a fantasy they can't see the truth. Paul is the Parrot and no one else. There are imitators but there is only one Parrot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 Paul, It does not show a lack of respect. It is a clear objection and request to rethink such an arbitrary policy. Politics (or whatever Amy decides to ban) did not cause the flame wars any more than someone requesting information on SET is bound to set one off. Since when did objecting to some 'rule' or some 'opinion' become a bad thing? "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privelege to do so too." Simple statement. One who subscribes to such a philosophy doesn't believe everyone need lay down in agreement with them nor do they acquiece their right to state their opinion. Amy has stated to me her reason for the ban. Fine. The same reason for banning politics applies equally to religion, guns, sex, SET, horn speakers, Jazz, AUDIO, and anything else someone might have a countering opinion on. Why aren't these things banned? How many flame wars on here had nothing to do with politics? The vast majority. So what does banning politics accomplish other than having done 'something' and allowing certain people to be happy because politics is too 'volatile' for them? One of the most important things in life is an individuals ability to lead their life without unfair constraints on their freedoms. Those constraints are generally placed on us by some governing body. Discussing or objecting to that governing body is one of the most important responsibilities ANY citizen has. That is philosophy NOT a political statement. Why do it on an audio board? Because there is a common interest and the natural upshot of that is to discuss other issues which are relevant to us. If they are not relevant to you, then don't participate... but because you don't like it is no valid reason to ban anything. I am not interested in a lot of $hit on here; I simply don't view it or comment on it or fire off complaint after complaint to the moderators saying it upsets me. What you seem to propose is only those topics and viewpoints which are acceptable to you or mirror yours should be permitted to be discussed. Reminds me of the person who demands everybody be open-minded. As soon as someone disagrees with them, they accuse them of being close-minded. Pure hypocrisy. Some disagree with the changes implemented. They are following the policy. They state their objections and viewpoints - permit them that right... or is that, too, banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 This isn't my forum, and it isn't your forum. I don't make the rules here and neither do you. Anyone here has the choice to follow the rules Klipsch has laid down or take a hike. As Amy said just yesterday: "I'm not backing down from my position, so honestely, if you don't like it, then I thank you for your past constructive contributions, and I wish you luck in the future. I think it's a shame you can't adjust, and some personalities will be missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 ---------------- On 6/19/2004 9:44:05 AM paulparrot wrote: This isn't my forum, and it isn't your forum. I don't make the rules here and neither do you. Anyone here has the choice to follow the rules Klipsch has laid down or take a hike. As Amy said just yesterday: "I'm not backing down from my position, so honestely, if you don't like it, then I thank you for your past constructive contributions, and I wish you luck in the future. I think it's a shame you can't adjust, and some personalities will be missed. ---------------- To your point, Paul. I agree but... there is another choice. That is to comply with the rules and lobby to have them changed. To Amy's point, I think it merely substantiates my point. She believes she is right and everyone else is wrong. "..it's a shame you can't adjust...". She just placed herself in corner and effectively stated, it doesn't matter what is good for the forum or those who use the forum, my rule shall be. Tell me, why must I adjust my viewpoint and not she? Being a moderator does not make you omnipotent. Any leader who does not consider the happiness of all his (her) subjects does not remain so for long. Too bad politics can't be discussed, because this form of government has a long history. This too shall pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 Ah, so peaceful and tranquil around here. SAY, isn't it bird hunting season yet????!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 On the whole, I agee with Clipped and Anarchist -- eveything IS political. At any rate, Amy's job is not to run the forum in a way that is always in our best interest, but to run it in a way that is in Klipsch's best interest. Klipsch, I'm sure -- wants to create an environment conducive to the free sharing of information regarding their products, primarily. I guess if you call someone "an idiot", it's a personal attack -- but if you shroud the insult using a host of literary devices and complex verbiage -- "it's funnier than hell". If some of the SET folks want to enjoy unmolested discussions, they should quit making their recommendations in such a way that fosters a spirit of exclusivity, and in such a way that doesn't infer these devices are the most transparent, involving, musical devices ever to grace the planet -- and anyone who can't hear it -- are just deaf and dumb mutes. You know, we didn't start this "war", they did -- Notice that Leo, Erik, and some others NEVER get trouble from us. I wonder why? So, it's obviously not SET we have objection to, but the presentation of the idea that they are all that any God-fearing audiophile ever really needs (but keep a push-push close at hand, although we don't really now why). Everyone not related to this mess, please stay out of it and enjoy the exchange. Please. Anarchist, Amy probably isn't around -- so you moderate. C'mon Kelly and Co. -- let's settle this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 "You know, we didn't start this "war", they did --" Oh, Christ................. Dean, let's rap about audio. I just read quite a nice post of your's relating to crossovers. Get some measuring gear and follow through with what you doing. Put you time into that, put your "net" time at work towards research. This place is counter-productive. I should be soldering on a amp, or hitting yard sales, or housework, vehicle work.... Life's too short to burn up in front of a computer monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts