Jump to content

Paul R

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Paul R

  • Rank
    Ph.D. (un)Level Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    South West Wyoming

Recent Profile Visitors

20316 profile views
  1. I did a bit of research, and the Hana SMC cartridge is a clean fit with no shims needed on the Planar 3, 6, 8, and RP10s - or so they say. It is a relatively inexpensive cartridge at $750, and every time I hear one, I want to take it home with me. -Paul
  2. Wow - you are the second person that has mentioned that to me. It is inexpensive enough to pick up a wall shelf I guess, but I use some vibration control apps that Barry Diamante designed. I had em fabricated in Austin, but there are much less expensive ways to do that as well. All the important gear here "floats". Holy bats! That shelf is $225. Do you guys think it will really make that much of a difference? -Paul
  3. Dudley is one of my long time favorite people and audio writers. One of the people I may not always agree with, but whose opinions I respect. Listening #196 at least, has the most perfect quote.
  4. That's a good point, but nobody argues like some of these folks do.
  5. That I can pretty well agree with, but it is one hell of a long way from:
  6. Oh common Danny - you know very well that there are just a small group of people here that I am talking about. I will go so far as to say "if" that group does indeed exist, then they are manipulating the reactions of some, perhaps most of the rest of the people here. And this is indeed far easier to believe than to accept MQA is some kind of worldwide menace in collusion with the big record labels to curtail our freedom and lock up the market. Of course, the old saying, "Why attribute evil to that which can be more simply explained by stupidity" does seem to apply quite well to MQA. I think you are simply ignoring bad behavior because you agree with the thinking about MQA. I do too, but that doesn't make me blind. -Paul
  7. If it was just Scoggins, I would agree with you. But a whole list of people have been treated this way, and *that* just screams out there is some kind of - something. I don't know what wording to use other than "planned effort." Even if, I will grant you, that "planning" may have been informal. (Informal would equal gang thinking to me.)
  8. I don't know, but this a whole different thing than sitting in a session together at RMAF. If you want to equate this topic to a free "pub" atmosphere, then driving a commercial interest in it is simply wrong. If you are paying for the privilege of driving a commercial interest, then you should make that crystal clear so that people know you may use information or commentary provided in your commercial interest.
  9. (grin) Well, I don't mind honest disagreement at all. Perhaps I will reconsider and change my mind after I think on it a bit. But as of now, I seriously find it incredulous to believe there is not some coordinated/planned/designed purpose behind the flurry of such activity.
  10. I see your point, but with respect, disagree. Also, better the enemy you know than the one who remains unseen.
  11. Then you should go promote that aim on your own system somewhere, and not involve this system. Who knows what you open up any innocent participant here to with such a goal? And it might break the CA rules by bringing commercial interest into the system, and or unwittingly enlisting people to aid in a commercial goal when the topic is not clearly identified as commercial.
  12. Absolutely - and without a doubt that is a great loss for CA and a definite win for the pro-MQA side. It makes us all look unreasonable, childish, and foolish. Exactly the opposite of what was, I am sure, intended. -Paul
  13. The hostility expressed as passive-aggressive behavior? That's exactly what I am grousing about. I really despise passive-aggressive attacks, probably because I am just not built to deal well with them. I learned how of course, but I don't like it and probably never will accept it as a reasonable form of controlling a conversation, topic, marketing, etc. -Paul
  14. Well, I will certainly agree with that statement. I do think there is some level of design behind those actions, the same as there was from MQA at Chris RMAF session. Stuff like this can happen once, maybe even twice as a coincidence, but four or five times? With absolutely predictable reactions? I don't go for conspiracy theories, but clearly, the actions of getting X number of people banned are not coincidental, and that implies at least some sort of planning. -Paul
  • Create New...