Bi-wiring
 

In article ,
Kurt Hamster wrote:
Any that are provable, rather than the usual 'even my wife can tell the
difference' ?

If the wife prefers the sound then isn't that a merit?

Depends on the wife. Perhaps she would have more confidence in her
judgement and be willing to have it scientifically tested, unlike most
here?

--
*Eat well, stay fit, die anyway

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Bi-wiring
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:36:39 +0100, The EggKing used
to say...

Only worth while in a dual amp setup.

Perhaps you missed his description of dual monoblocks?

For gods sake, can you just take part in any group without you're cock sure
****** attitude??

TOSSER.

Bi-wiring
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:22:02 +0100, Dave Plowman used
to say...

In article ,
Kurt Hamster wrote:
YMMV. Passive biamping has merits,

Any that are provable, rather than the usual 'even my wife can tell the
difference' ?

If the wife prefers the sound then isn't that a merit?

You aint got a wife.

Bi-wiring
 

Once again you miss the point (no doubt to you being totally wrapped in
the technical aspects). Most people have audio equaipment to enjoy
music, if something they added increases that enjoyment then, regardless
of the technical viewpoint, surely that something has merit? After all
it has increased their perceived enjoyment.

OK. Snake Oil for ever! :-)

Bi-wiring
 

Not dense!..........indeed, simply run tandem cables from the amp to the
loudspeaker (being mindful of polarity). Also correct, remove the jumper
straps. A personal tip...I as a rule always dip the cable ends(pins, lugs,
spades, nannas, whatever) in a bit of rubbing alcohol just prior to
tightening. I find this not only helps clean the connections of any oxide,
but helps prevent it as well!

Regards from the USA

Bi-wiring
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message


Once again you miss the point (no doubt to you being totally wrapped
in the technical aspects). Most people have audio equaipment to enjoy
music, if something they added increases that enjoyment then,
regardless of the technical viewpoint, surely that something has
merit? After all it has increased their perceived enjoyment.

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's convince as many people as we can that getting
naked and coating themselves with olive oil will increase their enjoyment of
their audio system.

LOL!

Bi-wiring
 

On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 23:35:06 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 20:56:55 GMT, Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:59:58 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message


Once again you miss the point (no doubt to you being totally wrapped
in the technical aspects). Most people have audio equaipment to enjoy
music, if something they added increases that enjoyment then,
regardless of the technical viewpoint, surely that something has
merit? After all it has increased their perceived enjoyment.

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's convince as many people as we can that getting
naked and coating themselves with olive oil will increase their enjoyment of
their audio system.

It does, especially in mixed company. What, you didn't know this?

So that's why the teutonic 'tard is the way he is!

I'm with Pinky, it would certainly increase my enjoyment, AFAIAC it
definately has merit, though I'm not so sure extra virgin would be the
way to go on this occasion.

Any party can benefit from an extra virgin..............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Bi-wiring
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:59:58 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's convince as many people as we can that getting
naked and coating themselves with olive oil will increase their enjoyment of
their audio system.


It does, especially in mixed company. What, you didn't know this?



I don't suppose you play Twister by any chance?

Roger.

Bi-wiring
 

0 means nothing, ie it doesn't exist
1 means something, ie it does exist.

It appears that you are the one who does not understand what you
wrote, which was a mathematical expression, not a philosophical one.

In the context of this argument I understood what Kurt wrote and I also
would agree.

So the difference between something existing and not existing is far
greater than increasing the number of existing things.

I don't agree.


Hmm you'd be happy all alone on the whole wide world?
If you had something when previously you had nowt would this not be better
than having many?

Example1:

You have to walk 10 miles to work.. no other means available.. therefore 10
miles back.

Oneday you awake and a Audi TT is sitting in your drive with a full tank of
fuel :-)

WOW you jump in and enjoy your journey to work AND back.

Example2:

You drive to work everyday in your Audi TT... nothing much thought of it as
it sits in your drive every morning.

Oneday you awake and the front of the house is littered with Audi TT's,
however overwhelmed you may feel at having so many cars you can still only
drive 1 at a time.

So therefore is not better to have 1 than many if you had nowt before?

Steve

Bi-wiring
 

In message , Kurt Hamster
writes
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 10:24:40 GMT, Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 10:10:45 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 07:04:24 GMT, Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 01:27:24 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

Don't forget that the difference between 0 and 1 is greater than the
difference between 1 and 1,000,000.

Wrong again.

Is it?

Yes.

You're wrong then. Simple as that.

No, Stewart's quite right. 'Difference' is a precise mathematical
statement. The difference between 0 and 1 is 1.

Now if you had said 'ratio', that would have been a very different
thing.
--
Chris Morriss