Re: Rx for DBTs in hobby magazines ... LOt"S ;-)

On May 12, 7:24=A0pm, "JBorg, Jr." <Edd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > ScottW wrote:
> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
>
> >> no, you insist that stereophile write DBT reviews.
>
> > Tell you what, you go ahead and define my position
> > for me, point out the fallacies and inconsistencies
> > in it,
>
> Do you make an effort when asking stupid questions,
> or is it a gift ?
>
> There are numerous inconsistencies and fallacies
> in your position. =A0Number 0ne, in requiring the reviewers
> to perform dbt audio testing on review samples, the test
> would not proved anything to me if they fail to detect
> differences.

 To you.  All I say is it would matter to me.


>
> Number two, there are cluster of aphids glowing on top
> of your head. =A0You will need a skillful barber to have
> them remove. =A0Let him shave your head and have him
> scrape these clumps of tubules sticking out of your
> scalp for small, additional fee.
>
> Number three, these business of audio testing has gone
> way over your head that I now think that eating bugs
> would be a better alternative in helping to keep your
> mind in check when you aren't so preoccupied with
> your audio hardware. =A0You should start by tallying the types
> of bugs available to you in your front yard and have these
> information ready next time McKelvy rear his ugly head
> at Rao.

  Why does my opinion of the value of DBT in audio
reviews send you into such a tizzy?
 You'd think I hit you with an ESD gun set to 15 kV.

ScottW