Thread View: uk.rec.audio
48 messages
48 total messages
Started by 9/11 Wasn't Real
Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:59
A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: 9/11 Wasn't Real
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:59
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:59
275 lines
17395 bytes
17395 bytes
Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.
The symptoms of this preoccupation are well known: an inclination to
attach enormous significance to audio equipment's capacity to induce
sonic pleasure and an inordinate emphasis on the sensuality of the
reproduced sound, with a consequent tendency to relegate the music
itself to a secondary position. We can also recognize in this
obsessional interest a need to amplify very small differences between
audio components out of all proportion to their true value. These
audiophiles are prone to convert such differences into preferences,
and institute them as rigid ideals.
It is easy enough to dismiss the lunatic fringe. but it is more
important to try to understand it. With this purpose in mind I wish to
undertake a brief analysis of the psychology of this group of
audiophiles.
I know that some readers may feel uneasy with psychology intruding
upon the sphere of musical reproduction, but perhaps they can reassure
themselves with the thought that psychological knowledge has been
partly responsible for bringing some 'sanity' into the controlled
subjective assessment of hi-fi equipment. What is more, techniques
evolved in the psychological laboratory have been useful in solving a
variety of psychoacoustical problems. However, while these
applications have been primarily directed at the perception of
reproduced music and speech, I am proposing now that we focus our
attention on some aspects of the personality of this special group of
audiophiles.
Naturally this kind of investigation will require a different approach
and I expect some readers will find the topic under discussion
unfamiliar. But I have made every effort to draw upon our common
experiences of musical reproduction in arguing my case.
Some of you will wonder how I have collected my data, but discretion
requires that I say little. I can tell you that I have had discussions
with members of this group and have also observed auditioning sessions
with some of these people. In addition, I have examined the linguistic
content of their magazines.
For most of us, listening to a chosen disc would involve placing the
record on a turntable and making the audio equipment operational.
Thereafter we are free to listen - our focus of attention is on the
music. Our attention may drawn away from the music by the reproduction
of an unexpected pressing defect, which may prove irritating
temporarily; but we accommodate to this nuisance and re-establish the
original focus of attention.
Another sort of non-musical sound may prove more disturbing. For
instance, our attention may be drawn away from the music by a loud hum
issuing from the loudspeakers. Perhaps this is due to an electrical
fault in one of our components, and as it is more difficult to
tolerate this kind of disturbance, the faulty component may have to be
repaired in order to restore our musical pleasure.
In quite a different situation we may actually choose to weaken our
attention to the music and shift the focus to some characteristics of
an audio component. I am thinking of the situation in which one would
audition a selection of loudspeakers with the aim of making a
purchase, when some models may produce disturbing colorations or other
undesirable sounds. At times such as these, listening to the music,
while still the main justification of our activity, is relegated to a
subordinate position. The audible characteristics of the equipment are
the matter at hand, and it is these that we judge. We search for
differences and try to establish preferences.
I am citing these examples in order to underline the common basis of
all listeners' responses to musical reproduction. We should recognize
that the relationship between our listening to music and our listening
to the characteristic sound of audio equipment is not a constant one.
It can shift if the circumstances demand it, but it is clear that
members of the lunatic fringe have shifted an unusually large
proportion of their attention over to the audio equipment.
This shift is not a temporary one. It is long-term. For this group of
audiophiles hi-fi equipment does not merely serve the purpose of
listening through, rather it has also become something to listen to.
We can say that members of this group have relegated the music itself
to a position of lesser prominence. This view is further justified on
the basis of additional evidence: the lunatic fringe insist that their
access to musical pleasure is dependent on the special characteristics
of the audio equipment that they own or aspire to own. It is as if the
real aim of musical reproduction, to listen to an account of a musical
composition, is displaced. It is displaced onto an object (the audio
equipment) which becomes at least as important a source of pleasure
for the listener. I will refer to this phenomenon as hi-fi fetishism.
I feel fully justified in employing a term which derives its meaning
from an extreme form of sexual behaviour; but I am sure you need to be
convinced of the applicability of this nomenclature. Typically, a
fetishist is someone who has endowed an inanimate object (eg a piece
of underclothing, a high-heeled shoe) with sexual significance. He or
she requires the presence of this fetish in order to become sexually
aroused, and this is the case regardless of whether a human subject is
present. Sexual pleasure is entirely dependent on the fetish.
This form of sexual behaviour, while no doubt extreme, is really a
gross amplification of normal responses. We are all capable of
investing an inanimate object with sexual significance, but what has
happened for the fetishist is that the usual source of sexual
pleasure, another human being, is replaced by an object which itself
becomes the source of pleasure.
In the case of the hi-fi fetishist the true object of his pleasure.
the music, has been displaced. Or to put it another way, this pleasure
has become dependent upon the particular characteristics of the audio
equipment. This is not to suggest that the hi-fi fetishist likes music
less, it is simply that a shift of attention has placed the emotional
and perceptual priority firmly on the audio equipment. This accounts
for the equipment's transformation into a fetish.
We observed that the sexual fetishist endows an inanimate object with
powers not normally assigned to it. Thus without any alteration in its
real nature that object is aggrandized and exalted. It has magical
powers assigned to it which resonate on a level of fantasy in the mind
of the fetishist. I think it is possible to explain the hi-fi
fetishist's attitude of over-estimation and over-valuation by recourse
to the same process of idealization. Look at it this way. A piece of
music we love will have the power to move us whether we hear it
reproduced via a music-centre or a high quality system; this is the
power of art. Indeed, many of us may describe this encounter with the
music as magical. But what happens in the case of the hi-fi fetishist
who has shifted the psychological priority from the music to the
reproducing equipment? Musical pleasure (as with sexual pleasure)
becomes dependent on the magical properties of the fetish, the audio
equipment. But audio components do not possess any magical properties
- they are under the control of the laws of physics.
Like the sexual fetishist, the hi-fi fetishist cannot fully bend to
the demands of reality for the simple reason that his relationship to
the fetish is active on a level of fantasy. Of course, the hi-fi
fetishist is not completely out of touch with reality, otherwise he
would need to deny the existence of the laws of physics. Therefore, in
order to 'accommodate' his magical thinking to reality he modifies it
so that he can still enjoy the pleasure afforded to him by his hi-fi
system. We see these modifications appearing in the hi-fi press in the
form of mystification. This reconstituted form of magical thinking is
transparent to all those who are not under its power, but for those
who are, it is very convincing.
The form that this mystifying language takes is quite evocative, which
it must be in order to maintain the imaginary intensity of the fetish
under review. The characteristics of this language are well known:
they are ambiguous. motoric, sensual. Here are four examples. Notice
the way the audio equipment is assigned a fetishistic value: it can
excite and arouse emotion, or fail to do so.
Pay attention to the implied sensuality and physicality. No doubt you
will recognize the tendency toward over-estimation. Finally, try to
bear in mind that the fetishist can no longer sustain a normal
relationship to music but needs audio equipment of a certain kind to
allow him access to musical pleasure. (I have retained the anonymity
of the following selected samples, but they are representative of some
of the popular British hi-fi press. Brand names have been edited out.)
But given the right amp and speakers, the speed and dynamics of
xyz mean that a whole gamut of musical emotions can be reproduced.
Speed... is very difficult to put into words. The speed of a
system has an effect on the overall perspective with which it is
perceived and the level of excitement it can generate...
The transformation of sound when switching to the xyz was mind-
blowing. The improvements in bass tightness and detail, imagery and
general low-level detail resolution was of such a magnitude as to make
confirmatory A-B listening tests redundant and pointless.... [With
this pickup arm] more emotion in vocals and in musical expression was
obvious, and it became far easier to get into the music.
My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of
conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by
musicians in a performance...
At this stage I think we can claim to have a better understanding of
the hi-fi fetishist's special relationship to his audio equipment. Yet
we need to go a little deeper than this to appreciate fully the
psychological importance of the fetish.
Let us turn to the sphere of sexual fetishism again in order to get
our bearings. As we have observed, the fetishist has difficulty in
functioning in a normal sexual manner; his natural responses have been
distorted. He cannot establish a sexual relationship with another
person unless it is mediated by the fetish, and sexual arousal is
dependent on the fetish. This indicates, and clinical studies confirm
this, that the fetishist feels sexually inadequate in the presence of
a human subject. Being under his control, the fetish does not pose
this threat to its owner, and thus allows to him the potency he would
otherwise lack.
Before I begin building the bridge between this feature of sexual
fetishism and hi-fi fetishism I must cite a few more familiar
examples, otherwise what I have to say may meet with strong
opposition. I am sure we are familiar with a particular remark that
reviewers sometimes make at the conclusion of their test reports.
Having assessed an excellent audio component which is outside their
own financial reach, they say that they are sorry to see it go. While
the professional reviewer is fully aware of the component's virtues he
does not feel compelled to purchase it - because reality, financial
reality, is a major consideration.
As we would expect, financial realities are not handled with such
objectivity by members of the lunatic fringe. Should a very expensive
'better' component come onto the market they will somehow find the
means to acquire it. For example, upon the appearance of a new and
very expensive audiophile product a fetishist remarked: 'If it is
better I'll have to buy it'. This continual search for perfection, or
'up-grading' as it is sometimes called, can lead to financial
disaster. Under severe pressure from debts many a member of the
lunatic fringe has been forced to sell his highly prized system.
>From our observations of the lamenting reviewer we can predict the
reaction of the hi-fi fetishist to separation from his audio
equipment. Of course, in the latter case the stakes are higher;
consequently, the sense of loss is far greater. He describes his
feelings as depression, a sense of emptiness, depletion, etc. Do not
be surprized by the depth of his feelings. Have we not observed that
the fetishist maintains his relationship to the equipment on a level
of fantasy? We should, therefore, expect the same fantasy relationship
to operate in his separation from the fetish.
One more bit of evidence would be in order before I present my final
interpretation. We all know how hi-fi fetishists defend their choice
of components tenaciously. For example, writing in the hi-fi press a
'reviewer' may aggrandise and exalt a piece of audio equipment. He
insinuates that his fetish is 'better' or 'best', assuming its
superiority and implicitly demeaning any competing products. What is
also evident here is a wish to be envied for the possession of an
idealized object. One can even discern a sense of triumph (see the
letters of Mr. Ted Meyer, HFN/RR April 1980). However, I have observed
that when a fetishist discovers that someone else's equipment is
superior, his reaction is akin to narcissistic injury.
We are now in a much better position to understand the psychological
significance of the hi-fi fetish. I would like to suggest that the
fetishist treats the fetish as an extension of himself. To be more
accurate, we should say that the fetish is a representation of his
ideal self. Does the fetish not give him the powers he would like to
have? Does it not lend him the authority he needs? Surely his
passionate claims for sonic superiority and audio perfectionism
confirm this; as do his establishment of rigid ideals. Indeed, he
tenaciously defends his choice of equipment because he measures his
ego against this ideal. Thus the hi-fi equipment acts as a mirror to
the ideal self.
No doubt you are still wondering why it is that among audiophiles only
some become fetishists, while the majority remain mere enthusiasts.
Here generalizations about psychological dispositions become more
difficult, but perhaps one can go a little way toward a solution by
examining the effects of fetishistic publicity in the hi-fi press. As
I see it, this publicity - in the form of reviews and test reports as
well as paid advertising - is partly responsible for leading young
people into the lunatic fringe. Study shows that this publicity begins
by working on one's natural appetite for pleasure. But the pleasure it
appeals to is the pleasure of ownership. While musical pleasure is
held to be the ultimate aim, this kind of publicity really glorifies
the pleasure of having a certain audio component. It proposes to offer
us something better, something better than we have now, and this way
it works on our insecurity or doubt and sets up an insidious form of
envy.
As we would expect, rational assessment can do very little against
such feelings; it is a poor weapon against the mystifications of
fetishistic publicity. I might add that manufacturers who allow
themselves to be exalted and aggrandized by fetishists in the same
manner as their products are doing themselves a disservice. For they
too are indulging in a form of narcissistic gratification and are
lending yet further credibility to the lunatic fringe.
>From Hi-Fi News and Record Review, October 1981
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/zfetish.html
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Peter Wieck
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:43
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:43
6 lines
1624 bytes
1624 bytes
On Mar 7, 9:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" <ilovesa...@lycos.com> wrote: Are your eyes brown? Do you even have eyes? Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Karl Winkler
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:27
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:27
19 lines
2527 bytes
2527 bytes
On Mar 7, 7:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" <ilovesa...@lycos.com> wrote: > Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who > show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own > sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed > irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been > repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality. > The same observation could be held for those into photography (equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc. There must be some basic human need to attach significance to objects beyond what can be observed in the physical realm. Perhaps it's simpler than that: people wish to buy things that they can't attain some other way. In the photo newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc. Karl
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Fred DeRosa
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:51
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:51
27 lines
2876 bytes
2876 bytes
"Karl Winkler" <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1173284864.637541.115070@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 7, 7:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" <ilovesa...@lycos.com> wrote: >> Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who >> show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own >> sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed >> irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been >> repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality. >> > > The same observation could be held for those into photography > (equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc. There must be some basic > human need to attach significance to objects beyond what can be > observed in the physical realm. Perhaps it's simpler than that: people > wish to buy things that they can't attain some other way. In the photo > newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique > groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the > merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the > difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc. > > Karl It could be worse, I could have a computer equipment fetish. I would go broke much faster just trying to keep up with the latest and greatest. I am still using the stereo system I got in 1987, which still out performs current comparable offerrings atmo.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: David Grant
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:00
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:00
23 lines
2182 bytes
2182 bytes
"9/11 Wasn't Real" <ilovesanta@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1173279553.679134.295970@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... > Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who > show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own > sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed > irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been > repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality. > Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm and we have a relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. He recently brought in a Monster power-conditioner and demoed it for some of the staff in the office, stating afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our projects. While such equipment can help in specific situations he obviously didn't understand the theory behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great salesman (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design work. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Arny Krueger
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:03
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:03
36 lines
2846 bytes
2846 bytes
"Karl Winkler" <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1173284864.637541.115070@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com > The same observation could be held for those into > photography (equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc. To varying degrees. Add Golf. > There must be some basic human need to attach > significance to objects beyond what can be observed in > the physical realm. Rather readily observable in Shinto and other similar religions. Also observable in some forms of Christianity, examples being so-called holy relics, etc. > Perhaps it's simpler than that: > people wish to buy things that they can't attain some > other way. Buying takes mere money as opposed to interaction or commitment. > In the photo newsgroups, equipment is > discussed endlessly while the .technique groups see very > little activity. Not so much that way in Video groups, particuarly those related to video editing. > Clearly, it's easier to discuss the > merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really > makes the difference: the recording or photography > techniques, etc. Seems like there is some balance between those influences in RAP.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Richard Crowley
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:11
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:11
12 lines
1940 bytes
1940 bytes
"David Grant" wrote ... > Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm and we have a > relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. He recently brought in a Monster > power-conditioner and demoed it for some of the staff in the office, > stating afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our projects. > While such equipment can help in specific situations he obviously didn't > understand the theory behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great > salesman (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design work. Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen. You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive practices, but maybe they are in denial. :-)
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Arny Krueger
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:22
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:22
22 lines
2725 bytes
2725 bytes
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote in message news:558h2nF2377dbU1@mid.individual.net > "David Grant" wrote ... >> Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm >> and we have a relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. >> He recently brought in a Monster power-conditioner and >> demoed it for some of the staff in the office, stating >> afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our >> projects. While such equipment can help in specific >> situations he obviously didn't understand the theory >> behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great salesman >> (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design >> work. > Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen. > You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive > practices, but maybe they are in denial. :-) IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have a strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as one can know too much to be an effective salesman.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: shoppa
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:35
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:35
9 lines
1929 bytes
1929 bytes
On Mar 7, 2:11 pm, "Richard Crowley" <rcrow...@xp7rt.net> wrote: > Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen. > You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive practices, > but maybe they are in denial. :-) Old joke: What's the difference between a computer salesman and a used car salesman? The used car salesman knows that he's lying. Tim.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Phil Allison
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:49
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:49
16 lines
1542 bytes
1542 bytes
"Arny Krueger" > > IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have > a strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as > one can know too much to be an effective salesman. ** Just like having a conscience or any empathy would get in the way of being an effective Nazi ? ....... Phil
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark Ilsley
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:16
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:16
22 lines
1988 bytes
1988 bytes
You should know. "Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:558mrkF23pk02U1@mid.individual.net... > > "Arny Krueger" > >> >> IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them >> have a strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad >> thing, as one can know too much to be an effective salesman. > > > ** Just like having a conscience or any empathy would get in the way of > being an effective Nazi ? > > > > > ....... Phil > >
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: AZ Nomad
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:58
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:58
12 lines
1745 bytes
1745 bytes
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley <markilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote: >"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message <snipped> >You should know. Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around your circle of friends? Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into junior high school.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Lord Valve
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:04
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:04
17 lines
1704 bytes
1704 bytes
9/11 Wasn't Real wrote: Yeah, all that shit that blew up in New York was a fuckin' cartoon, right? You asshole. > My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of > conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by > musicians in a performance... BwahahahahahahHAH! The jerk who wrote that is as dumb as you are. LV
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Peter Wieck
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 00:15
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 00:15
25 lines
2161 bytes
2161 bytes
On Mar 7, 6:04 pm, Lord Valve <detri...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > 9/11 Wasn't Real wrote: > > Yeah, all that shit that blew up in New York was a fuckin' cartoon, right? > > You asshole. > > > My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of > > conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by > > musicians in a performance... > > BwahahahahahahHAH! > > The jerk who wrote that is as dumb as you are. > > LV Valvey... Valvey... Valvey This jackass is searching for a nibble. My response was to attempt to ascertain the sh*t-level-by-eye-color... Dumb, not hardly. Pulling various and sundry chains... precisely. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: roughplanet
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 01:33
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 01:33
28 lines
2519 bytes
2519 bytes
"9/11 Wasn't Real" <ilovesanta@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1173279553.679134.295970@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... > Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who > show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own > sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed > irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been > repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality. > > <snip most of this post for brevity's sake> > > As we would expect, rational assessment can do very little against > such feelings; it is a poor weapon against the mystifications of > fetishistic publicity. I might add that manufacturers who allow > themselves to be exalted and aggrandized by fetishists in the same > manner as their products are doing themselves a disservice. For they > too are indulging in a form of narcissistic gratification and are > lending yet further credibility to the lunatic fringe. > > >From Hi-Fi News and Record Review, October 1981 > http://www.heretical.com/miscella/zfetish.html A precised version of this post, albeit somewhat tongue in cheek, can be had by listening to Flanders' & Swan's song 'High Fidelity'. Can't remember whether it's on their first album, 'At the Drop of a Hat' or on their second, 'At the Drop of Another Hat'. Sorry. ruff
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark Ilsley
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 02:01
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 02:01
20 lines
2166 bytes
2166 bytes
In this case, who needs to make an argument. (p.s. Death to all bottom posters and Phil-o-philes) "AZ Nomad" <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote in message news:slrneuugro.8mm.aznomad.2@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net... > On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley <markilsley@dodo.com.au> > wrote: >>"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message > <snipped> > >>You should know. > > > Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around > your circle of friends? > > Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into > junior high school. >
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: roughplanet
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 03:02
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 03:02
26 lines
2279 bytes
2279 bytes
"AZ Nomad" <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote in message news:slrneuugro.8mm.aznomad.2@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net... On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley <markilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote: "Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message <snipped> > >You should know. > Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around > your circle of friends? > > Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into > junior high school. If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's circle of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less. Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or other, and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject. ruff
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 04:08
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 04:08
26 lines
2264 bytes
2264 bytes
"roughplanet" <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:45ef7cc0$0$2917$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au... :: : If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's circle : of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're : referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less. : Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term : 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or other, : and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject. : : ruff : I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who mentioned it i.e. Philthy. Cheers TT
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: roughplanet
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 04:56
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 04:56
25 lines
2331 bytes
2331 bytes
"TT" <TTencerNOmorespam@westnet.com.au> wrote in message news:45ef8c21$1@quokka.wn.com.au... "roughplanet" <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:45ef7cc0$0$2917$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au... : > : If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's circle > : of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're > : referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less. > : Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term > : 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or other, > : and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject. > I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-) > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law > > BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who > mentioned it i.e. Philthy. How appropriate. Godwin must know Philthy pretty well :-). ruff
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Philip Homburg
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 08:36
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 08:36
29 lines
2473 bytes
2473 bytes
In article <1173284864.637541.115070@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, Karl Winkler <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote: >In the photo >newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique >groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the >merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the >difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc. First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited to just reproduction of what somebody else has recorded. Just about the only creative input is which track to play next. However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example, photography techniques. And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion may not go anywhere. So in the end, it is quite possible that equipment oriented forums will see the most activity. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Arny Krueger
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:54
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:54
27 lines
2809 bytes
2809 bytes
"Philip Homburg" <philip@ue.aioy.eu> wrote in message news:8u6aslvfg801egs8e1p2ni1t42@inews_id.stereo.hq.phicoh.net > In article > <1173284864.637541.115070@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, > Karl Winkler <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote: >> In the photo >> newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the >> .technique groups see very little activity. Clearly, >> it's easier to discuss the merits of equipment rather >> than to focus on what really makes the difference: the >> recording or photography techniques, etc. > > First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited > to just reproduction of what somebody else has recorded. > Just about the only creative input is which track to play > next. Agreed. > However, my guess is that for the technically inclined > people it is much easier to talk about features of > equipment than to talk about, for example, photography > techniques. Anybody can recite the name of some new expensive piece of equipment and write poetry about it. You actually have to understand what you are doing to credibly discuss technique.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Peter Wieck
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 14:13
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 14:13
33 lines
3227 bytes
3227 bytes
On Mar 7, 2:22 pm, "Arny Krueger" <a...@hotpop.com> wrote: > IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have a > strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as one > can know too much to be an effective salesman. Add "honest" and your premise stands. In my opinion, the OP chooses simply not to get it. Writing for myself, I have a disproportionate amount of audio equipment about the house, and were it not for my twice-yearly purges at the Kutztown Vintage Radio meet, I would be over my ears (and divorced) in short order. Put simply, audio equipment is great good fun. Its permutations, combinations, differences and similarities while not endless are certainly entertaining if one has that turn-of-mind. And in my case after nearly 40 years of dabbling (started in my early teens), I am slowly starting down the murky home-brew path. Furthermore, the poor fools as described by the OP are few and far between. Enough to support an industry certainly. But that is not surprising given the total population. Some get into the esoteric because they can. A perfectly valid position and by no means indicative of a fetish. Some do so because that aspect of the hobby does not require any sort of basis in fact or practice and so they may spout endless babble without challenge. Also no indication of a fetish. Some even make a living at it. Certainly no fetish there. I would posit that the OP's fascination with its chosen target is just as indicative of a fetish as its target's purported behavior. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Karl Winkler
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:01
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:01
58 lines
4336 bytes
4336 bytes
On Mar 8, 1:36 am, phi...@ue.aioy.eu (Philip Homburg) wrote: > In article <1173284864.637541.115...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, > > Karl Winkler <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >In the photo > >newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique > >groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the > >merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the > >difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc. > > First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited to just > reproduction of what somebody else has recorded. Just about the only > creative input is which track to play next. However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker placement, acoustical treatments, etc. But instead, they talk mostly about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor. > > However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much > easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example, > photography techniques. Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning, along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while features of equipment requires rote memorization. > > And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music > or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion > may not go anywhere. True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying it that way, the results they got, and what they learned. Certainly, there are those who do this. But there are far more that talk about FPS, MP, VR, etc. and perhaps more importantly, why one brand's versions of these things are better than another. As if these things existed in a vacuum. > > So in the end, it is quite possible that equipment oriented forums will > see the most activity. Yes, definitely. Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings, types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same numbers. My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where art and technology meet. -Karl
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Dave Plowman (News)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:08
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:08
24 lines
2772 bytes
2772 bytes
In article <1173369680.866857.202090@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>,
Karl Winkler <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about
> instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings,
> types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about
> how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are
> those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same
> numbers.
> My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi
> Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general
> behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where
> art and technology meet.
On an audio or Hi-Fi group surely the discussion should be about things
technical, although plenty seem to look down their noses and say it should
be about music - despite there being countless groups specifically for
that.
--
*(on a baby-size shirt) "Party -- my crib -- two a.m
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Philip Homburg
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:31
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:31
51 lines
3620 bytes
3620 bytes
In article <1173369680.866857.202090@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, Karl Winkler <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote: >However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker >placement, acoustical treatments, etc. How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but not quite square room?" >But instead, they talk mostly >about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like >with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and >brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor. So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between hifi equipment? >> However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much >> easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example, >> photography techniques. > >Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning, >along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while >features of equipment requires rote memorization. No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment. >> And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music >> or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion >> may not go anywhere. > >True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people >talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying >it that way, the results they got, and what they learned. But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and most of those are already covered in books about the subject. "What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past", just isn't likely to stimulate discussion. Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Karl Winkler
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:22
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:22
27 lines
3097 bytes
3097 bytes
On Mar 8, 9:08 am, "Dave Plowman (News)" <d...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote: > In article <1173369680.866857.202...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, > Karl Winkler <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about > > instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings, > > types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about > > how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are > > those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same > > numbers. > > My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi > > Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general > > behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where > > art and technology meet. > > On an audio or Hi-Fi group surely the discussion should be about things > technical, although plenty seem to look down their noses and say it should > be about music - despite there being countless groups specifically for > that. > Well, there are technical things then there are technical things. I'm not sure how useful it is to endlessly argue about one capacitor dielectric vs. another one, although of course there are times for such discussions. I just think that the OP's point is interesting, and there is ample evidence pointing to what he is saying. -Karl
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Karl Winkler
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:30
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:30
72 lines
4978 bytes
4978 bytes
On Mar 8, 9:31 am, phi...@ue.aioy.eu (Philip Homburg) wrote: > In article <1173369680.866857.202...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, > > Karl Winkler <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker > >placement, acoustical treatments, etc. > > How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but > not quite square room?" > Why not? > >But instead, they talk mostly > >about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like > >with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and > >brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor. > > So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments > is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between > hifi equipment? > Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and discussions most people can use. > >> However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much > >> easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example, > >> photography techniques. > > >Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning, > >along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while > >features of equipment requires rote memorization. > > No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less > work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment. > I assume you meant "lifting"? Sure it's easier. But what of it? Is it easier to create a photograph that people would want to look at than to just turn on your audio system? > >> And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music > >> or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion > >> may not go anywhere. > > >True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people > >talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying > >it that way, the results they got, and what they learned. > > But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or > about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and > most of those are already covered in books about the subject. Perhaps, but the drawback of books is that in terms of the technology, they are usually out of date. Not only that, but the style of photographs is also out of date. Yes, general principals are well covered in the books and anyone desiring to learn more about the craft has a wealth of information from which to learn. But discussions are different because they are interactive and there may be the opportunity to hear from someone who has encountered your specific situation or knows about what you are trying to accomplish. > > "What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past", > just isn't likely to stimulate discussion. Maybe not - but that's the core of this thread isn't it? Why aren't those topics likely to generate discussion? > > Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks. Of course, but why? -Karl
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Peter Wieck
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:19
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:19
96 lines
5931 bytes
5931 bytes
On Mar 8, 1:30 pm, "Karl Winkler" <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions > are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and > discussions most people can use. Karl: You are taking the romance out of the hobby. The OP is clearly trolling for a fight as well as stating the common perceptions dressed up in the authoritative clothing of "A psychologist's view..." But the perceptions stated are entirely anecdotal. Also typical of the species (both psychologists and trolls). _________________________________ Information people can use? Try this: After some pretty basic parameters are met, there is not a whole helluva lot to choose between amplifiers, pre-amplifiers, tuners, or other forms of electronics. *All* other things being equal, more power is always better than less power. Speakers are the weakest link in any system. Effort and attention expended on speakers will pay off infinitely more than equal efforts and attention spent on electronics. Only you are the final judge of any given system. Said system can only be judge in your listening area with your choice of material. After some pretty basic parameters are met, any given CD player is as good as any other given CD player. After some pretty basic parameters are met, a good antenna will do more for your reception (AM or FM) than a fancy tuner. NO tuner can overcome the limitations of a poor antenna. An excellent antenna can put most tuners (after said parameters are met) on a near-as-much-as- matters equal footing. NO tuner will correct bad information coming in. Good antennas are cheaper than excellent tuners, however not every location will permit a good antenna. So there is always a reason to search for the very best tuner one can afford as long as the limitations are fully understood. Vinyl is the last true realm of black-magic in audio. The most costly item in any vinyl system is the vinyl, so the primary attention should be on protecting it. As it happens, systems good at protecting vinyl typically do a fair job of reproduction as well. As with speakers, care, time and attention here has a disproportionately positive result. As with everything else, only you can judge the results. After a certain point, improvements are inaudible. Only you can determine that point. If it seems not to make any sense, it likely does not improve sound either. If it cannot be explained in simple terms and with less than 20 words, it likely does not improve sound either. Not the details, but the concept. Codicil: Terms describing similar items should be common to both descriptions. If you like it and continue to like it, that is entirely enough. Expense does not equal quality. Quality is not necessarily expensive. Codicil A: $1000, some patience, care and attention and a modicum of pure blind luck will net a better system from eBay, flea-markets and/ or garage sales than from your local high-end shop at 5 x that number. Exceptions are anything that touches vinyl unless you are a good technician, and cartridges and stylii nearly always. Codicil B: After a certain point, increases in quality are at the inverse square to the increase in cost. That is, the cost curve goes nearly straight up to a gently sloping nearly linear quality curve. Many things such as speaker placement, room treatments and similar items are ultimately only for you to decide. If you are given advice, you don't have to follow it. If you seek advice, at least try it, but you still do not have to follow it to the end of time. You have the right to change your mind. Always. And for no reason at all. If you are not having fun/enjoying the hobby STOP. This isn't a fetish, after all. ______________________________ Information that can be used, based on my experience. As it is only based on my experience, it is limited in utility and not to be taken as holy writ, endowed with great (any) authority or much more than a vaguely humorous reply to your post. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: John Byrns
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:33
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:33
29 lines
3130 bytes
3130 bytes
In article <1173381547.540330.109030@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, "Peter Wieck" <pfjw@aol.com> wrote: > After some pretty basic parameters are met, a good antenna will do > more for your reception (AM or FM) than a fancy tuner. NO tuner can > overcome the limitations of a poor antenna. An excellent antenna can > put most tuners (after said parameters are met) on a near-as-much-as- > matters equal footing. NO tuner will correct bad information coming > in. Good antennas are cheaper than excellent tuners, however not every > location will permit a good antenna. So there is always a reason to > search for the very best tuner one can afford as long as the > limitations are fully understood. This idea is not entirely true with regards to tuners. One problem that a tuner with specs beyond those of "some pretty basic parameters" can correct, that the best antenna can't correct is the reception of distant stations with strong local adjacent channel stations on the same compass heading. Another problem that "some pretty basic parameters" are not likely protect against are 3rd order RF IM problems in the front end of the tuner which make reception of certain distant stations impossible, a better antenna often makes matters worse in this situation. Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Peter Wieck
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 20:22
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 20:22
37 lines
3815 bytes
3815 bytes
On Mar 8, 2:33 pm, John Byrns <byr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > In article <1173381547.540330.109...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, > This idea is not entirely true with regards to tuners. One problem that > a tuner with specs beyond those of "some pretty basic parameters" can > correct, that the best antenna can't correct is the reception of distant > stations with strong local adjacent channel stations on the same compass > heading. Another problem that "some pretty basic parameters" are not > likely protect against are 3rd order RF IM problems in the front end of > the tuner which make reception of certain distant stations impossible, a > better antenna often makes matters worse in this situation. Trust you, John, to go there. "Pretty basic parameters" would include (at least) 3 & 4 gang tuning systems (or electronic equivalents) able to deal with the above issues. So, for instance, a Dynaco FM-5 (or AF-6) would not meet those parameters, whereas a Revox A720 (which is also a creditable pre-amp) does. As would lots of Kenwoods, Sansuis, any number of Sanyos, of course Accuphase. Harmon-Kardon, Pioneer, and others come up as well. Even latter-day Marantz & McIntosh tuners after the "legendary" tube stuff. Tube tuners are different beasts and problematic, as the Marantz 10B is prone to exactly the problems you describe with or without a good antenna. The Dynaco FM-3 does barely OK, but perhaps better than its SS descendents, and not as well as the 10B. Some Scotts and Fishers do better than both. If one must have tubes. So, with patience, care and attention, a reasonable tuner should be doable for less than $400. With luck less than $200. Certainly less than the going rate for a 10B for better performance. Spend the rest of the tuner-allocated $$ on that antenna. Make sure it has a rotator, of course. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Andy Evans
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:34
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:34
9 lines
2249 bytes
2249 bytes
A few things here - I hope it's clear that this implies "one psychologists view" and not "the view of psychology". Second, HiFi devotees and music lovers are not a binary. Third, fetishism is only one of several hooks to hang this particular hat on, others being creativity and obsessional behaviour. The statements are so generalised I'd like to know more about the author's background in psychology. He doesn't seem to be following the thread as far as I can see - maybe he's just lobbed a grenade over the wall. I suspect this may also be a post from somebody with a different identity.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Harry Lavo
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 22:22
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 22:22
17 lines
2581 bytes
2581 bytes
"Andy Evans" <performanceandmedia@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1173389669.522014.122500@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... >A few things here - I hope it's clear that this implies "one > psychologists view" and not "the view of psychology". Second, HiFi > devotees and music lovers are not a binary. Third, fetishism is only > one of several hooks to hang this particular hat on, others being > creativity and obsessional behaviour. The statements are so > generalised I'd like to know more about the author's background in > psychology. He doesn't seem to be following the thread as far as I can > see - maybe he's just lobbed a grenade over the wall. I suspect this > may also be a post from somebody with a different identity. I hope you noted that the article is from the early '80's....so far as I can tell this was just a troll. Moreover, RAP has very little to do with audiophile obsession.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 14:01
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 14:01
33 lines
2908 bytes
2908 bytes
Phil is a very lonely man, extremely intelligent and knowledgeable, but unable to make people like him. His need for intellectual stimulation is in conflict with his revulsion for human contact. "roughplanet" <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:45ef9756$0$5745$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au... > "TT" <TTencerNOmorespam@westnet.com.au> wrote in message > news:45ef8c21$1@quokka.wn.com.au... > > "roughplanet" <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote in message > news:45ef7cc0$0$2917$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au... > : >> : If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's > circle >> : of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're >> : referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less. >> : Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term >> : 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or > other, >> : and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject. > >> I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-) >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law >> >> BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who >> mentioned it i.e. Philthy. > > How appropriate. Godwin must know Philthy pretty well :-). > > ruff > >
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Dave Plowman (News)
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:33
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:33
11 lines
2258 bytes
2258 bytes
In article <45f168a1$0$60332$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net>,
Mark <marknospampleaseilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote:
> Phil is a very lonely man,
Now there's a statement of the obvious. ;-)
--
*I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Philip Homburg
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:50
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:50
95 lines
5291 bytes
5291 bytes
In article <1173378645.133159.264920@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, Karl Winkler <karlwinkler66@yahoo.com> wrote: >On Mar 8, 9:31 am, phi...@ue.aioy.eu (Philip Homburg) wrote: >> In article <1173369680.866857.202...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, >> >> Karl Winkler <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker >> >placement, acoustical treatments, etc. >> >> How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but >> not quite square room?" >> >Why not? Okay, please tell me. >> >But instead, they talk mostly >> >about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like >> >with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and >> >brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor. >> >> So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments >> is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between >> hifi equipment? >> >Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions >are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and >discussions most people can use. For discussion, people have to disagree. For FAQs, it is much better to have web-site. >> No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less >> work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment. >> >I assume you meant "lifting"? Sure it's easier. But what of it? Is it >easier to create a photograph that people would want to look at than >to just turn on your audio system? So? Most people think their pictures are great (especially if they have high-end cameras). So taking pictures is slightly more difficult than playing a record, but not much (in some sense, properly adjusting a turntable takes a lot more technical knowledge than just pressing the shutter release on an auto-everything camera). >> But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or >> about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and >> most of those are already covered in books about the subject. > >Perhaps, but the drawback of books is that in terms of the technology, >they are usually out of date. What revolution in speaker placement did I miss? >But discussions are >different because they are interactive and there may be the >opportunity to hear from someone who has encountered your specific >situation or knows about what you are trying to accomplish. If a photography technique problem is common enough that other people already solved it, there is a very good chance that some textbook will provide the hints you need to solve it. Of course, expert can critique other people pictures. But that doesn't work very well for various reasons. In comparison, discussing equipment is much easier, so that is what people do. (If you are an expert in photography, you are probably out taking pictures, instead of looking at pictures that contain loads of mistakes that are mentioned in every textbook. >> "What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past", >> just isn't likely to stimulate discussion. > >Maybe not - but that's the core of this thread isn't it? Why aren't >those topics likely to generate discussion? Because most people don't care as much. And you need a very good author (who is also an accomplished photographer) to get something worth reading about the background of his photos. So most people can't really participate. >> Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks. > >Of course, but why? Because my car is better than you car. That's just the it works. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:20
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:20
81 lines
4939 bytes
4939 bytes
Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a characterisation? As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top! ...but don't let me stop you. The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to his source of income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical depression, as I suspect he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are worse! As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I have is from that pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is music, glorious music. The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've built him his own remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting at the end of his bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what compels me towards DIY. "TT" <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote in message news:45f1e405$1@quokka.wn.com.au... > > "Mark" <marknospampleaseilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote in message > news:45f168a1$0$60332$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net... >> Phil is a very lonely man, > > Except he voices in his head keep him company ;-) > >> extremely intelligent > > Intelligent maybe but NOT smart. A classic example is when > he paid A$4,500 for a dud set of Quad ESL 57s. Here is the > all time Quad expert making a complete fool of himself :-)) > It is a very funny story. BTW just as Pavlov trained dogs I > have trained Philthy. The mere mention of this will get him > to trot it all out again - just wait ;-) > >> and knowledgeable, but > > Yes he uses Google very well and this can feign knowledge > easily ;-) > >> unable to make people like him. > > This has something to do with his strict Catholic upbringing > and his repressed homosexual tendencies. > >> His need for intellectual stimulation is in > > The word you are looking for here is "Ego". This needs to > be constantly fed. e.g. just mention to him you have *any* > formal qualification (even a swimming certificate or drivers > license) and just see what happens let a alone a Uni degree. > Philthy has *NO* qualifications at all! Period. He does not > even have a driver's license. He is a failure at everything > he tried and even quit 2 years into a university degree that > was fully funded by a scholarship. > >> conflict with his revulsion for human contact. > > That is because every human he comes in contact with is > sickened by him. > > So Mark do we need to mention he is also a net stalking, > libelling, unemployed, backyard tinkerer who tries to fix > various pieces of domestic appliances on his kitchen table > as well? ;-) Or the fact that the only reason why his sorry > arse has not been dragged through the courts already for > defamation is that he has *NO* assets. He pretends to have > an income from his hobby "fix it" business he runs from his > rundown rented bed-sit when he is obviously receiving some > sort of govt. hand out. > > The truth is this guy is nothing but a very sad, lonely old > man who is a total failure at life and is really something > to be pitied. > > Regards TT (a past victim of this psycho) > >
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:45
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:45
57 lines
3662 bytes
3662 bytes
"Mark" <marknospampleaseilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote in message news:45f168a1$0$60332$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net... > Phil is a very lonely man, Except he voices in his head keep him company ;-) > extremely intelligent Intelligent maybe but NOT smart. A classic example is when he paid A$4,500 for a dud set of Quad ESL 57s. Here is the all time Quad expert making a complete fool of himself :-)) It is a very funny story. BTW just as Pavlov trained dogs I have trained Philthy. The mere mention of this will get him to trot it all out again - just wait ;-) > and knowledgeable, but Yes he uses Google very well and this can feign knowledge easily ;-) > unable to make people like him. This has something to do with his strict Catholic upbringing and his repressed homosexual tendencies. > His need for intellectual stimulation is in The word you are looking for here is "Ego". This needs to be constantly fed. e.g. just mention to him you have *any* formal qualification (even a swimming certificate or drivers license) and just see what happens let a alone a Uni degree. Philthy has *NO* qualifications at all! Period. He does not even have a driver's license. He is a failure at everything he tried and even quit 2 years into a university degree that was fully funded by a scholarship. > conflict with his revulsion for human contact. That is because every human he comes in contact with is sickened by him. So Mark do we need to mention he is also a net stalking, libelling, unemployed, backyard tinkerer who tries to fix various pieces of domestic appliances on his kitchen table as well? ;-) Or the fact that the only reason why his sorry arse has not been dragged through the courts already for defamation is that he has *NO* assets. He pretends to have an income from his hobby "fix it" business he runs from his rundown rented bed-sit when he is obviously receiving some sort of govt. hand out. The truth is this guy is nothing but a very sad, lonely old man who is a total failure at life and is really something to be pitied. Regards TT (a past victim of this psycho)
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 01:20
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 01:20
94 lines
5136 bytes
5136 bytes
"Mark" <marknospampleaseilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote in message news:45f1ebcd$0$60334$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net... > Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a characterisation? > I'll start at the beginning. Philthy here has a hobby business and as such under Australian taxation law is not registered for GST which means his turnover is less than A$50,000 per year. Where he lives and the rents he would paying makes for a very meagre lifestyle if this was his only income. Remember we are talking turnover not profit here. So it is an "educated guess" yes. see http://tinyurl.com/3bfrze > As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top! ...but don't let me > stop you. > Please remember that I and several of my friends in business here have had this guy has *PAY* for company searches on our businesses and then he has proceeded to malign and libel anyone else attached to those businesses in cluding family members. > The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to his source of > income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical depression, as I suspect > he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are worse! > I have no objection to Philthy receiving government assistance *except* he needs to forced to keep on his medications and/or institutionalised without internet access! Also please do not misunderstand my intention here, I am not in anyway belittling anyone who genuinely needs support *BUT* I am having a shot at Philthy who constantly carries on as if he is a grand entrepreneur and has a thriving electronics business. As you have no doubt seen he is constantly having a shot at *anyone* that has a mere glimmer of success attached to them and if in doubt please do a Google Groups search? > As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I have is from that > pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is music, glorious music. My sincerest sympathies here and am very pleased you can find happiness in music. I believe in genuine cases as yourself the social services are in no way doing enough to help and support people in your situation. I only have a problem with people recieving benefits they are not entitled to. BTW do a Google Groups search on philthy's name and "Autistic" http://tinyurl.com/ysnxme I also apologise in advance for the potential distress you may have in reading Philthy's posts in that link. I make it 836! So please tell me how much he really cares for the sufferes of this condition or the people engaged in their care? Or the numerous times he has told people to "get cancer and die"? I personally find it very difficult to to feel any sympathy for this sad little man and no hardship is too bad to befall him. > > The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've built him his own > remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting at the end of his > bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what compels me towards > DIY. > There will be enornous amout of good quality second hand gear coming on the market as manufacturers push for ever more featured gizmos ;-) Just think what a Playstation 2 will be worth in about 2 weeks ;-) As entertainment box with networking abilty, DVD/CD replay and a HD it may be something to think about perhaps. > > So finally Mark if I have offended you in any way please accept my apology as it was not my intention to disparage anyone except Philthy. Cheers TT
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Alan Rutlidge
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 04:30
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 04:30
135 lines
7462 bytes
7462 bytes
"TT" <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote in message news:45f1fa1c$1@quokka.wn.com.au... > > "Mark" <marknospampleaseilsley@dodo.com.au> wrote in message > news:45f1ebcd$0$60334$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net... >> Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a > characterisation? >> > I'll start at the beginning. Philthy here has a hobby > business and as such under Australian taxation law is not > registered for GST which means his turnover is less than > A$50,000 per year. Where he lives and the rents he would > paying makes for a very meagre lifestyle if this was his > only income. Remember we are talking turnover not profit > here. So it is an "educated guess" yes. > > see http://tinyurl.com/3bfrze > >> As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top! > ...but don't let me >> stop you. >> > Please remember that I and several of my friends in business > here have had this guy has *PAY* for company searches on > our businesses and then he has proceeded to malign and libel > anyone else attached to those businesses in cluding family > members. > >> The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to > his source of >> income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical > depression, as I suspect >> he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are > worse! >> > I have no objection to Philthy receiving government > assistance *except* he needs to forced to keep on his > medications and/or institutionalised without internet > access! Also please do not misunderstand my intention here, > I am not in anyway belittling anyone who genuinely needs > support *BUT* I am having a shot at Philthy who constantly > carries on as if he is a grand entrepreneur and has a > thriving electronics business. > > As you have no doubt seen he is constantly having a shot at > *anyone* that has a mere glimmer of success attached to them > and if in doubt please do a Google Groups search? > >> As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I > have is from that >> pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is > music, glorious music. > > My sincerest sympathies here and am very pleased you can > find happiness in music. I believe in genuine cases as > yourself the social services are in no way doing enough to > help and support people in your situation. I only have a > problem with people recieving benefits they are not entitled > to. > > BTW do a Google Groups search on philthy's name and > "Autistic" http://tinyurl.com/ysnxme > > I also apologise in advance for the potential distress you > may have in reading Philthy's posts in that link. > > I make it 836! So please tell me how much he really cares > for the sufferes of this condition or the people engaged in > their care? Or the numerous times he has told people to > "get cancer and die"? I personally find it very difficult > to to feel any sympathy for this sad little man and no > hardship is too bad to befall him. > > >> >> The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've > built him his own >> remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting > at the end of his >> bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what > compels me towards >> DIY. >> > There will be enornous amout of good quality second hand > gear coming on the market as manufacturers push for ever > more featured gizmos ;-) Just think what a Playstation 2 > will be worth in about 2 weeks ;-) As entertainment box > with networking abilty, DVD/CD replay and a HD it may be > something to think about perhaps. >> >> > So finally Mark if I have offended you in any way please > accept my apology as it was not my intention to disparage > anyone except Philthy. > > Cheers TT > Mark, Everything Terry has said is the truth. If anything I think he has painted an optimist's view of Phil and tried to see the positive side of him. For years I've been a victim of Phil. First it was just a fax message to my workplace, then numerous posts all over various newsgroups claiming I'm a sex tourist and a paedophile. Nothing could be further from the truth. Then came the harassment on Usenet of my business partner. Phil published his personal details all over several newsgroups and still got it wrong by not ensuring the so called "facts" were indeed up to date. He published links to our website making all sorts of unfounded accusations about the nature of our business.. Next he had someone do several visits to my home. Phil reporting on Usenet enough detailed information such as my address, what was growing in my front garden behind a brick wall etc to be convincing enough he had someone stalking me. Bear in mind I live in Perth - Phil lives in Sydney. Anyone going to this extreme to get some else to spy on someone thousands of kilometres away has (IMHO) some serious unresolved issues. In short the guy is a crackpot. As Terry has said, perhaps to be pitied, but IMHO he's positively dangerous. Stalking today - more serious crime tomorrow. All you need to do to get Phil's undivided attention is to openly disagree with something he has posted on UseNet. Doesn't matter what it is about. Within three posts in a thread you will be accused of being a "fuckwit", quickly followed by all manner of abuse. Then if you are really unlucky you may start to receive the same degree of unwanted attention some of us have had to endure. The above examples are but merely a small sample of what Phil is capable of. :-( Cheers, Alan
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 08:03
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 08:03
29 lines
2546 bytes
2546 bytes
"Alan Rutlidge" <don't_spam_me_rutlidge@iinet.net.au> wrote in message news:45f23467$0$8364$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au... > All you need to do to get Phil's undivided attention is to openly disagree > with something he has posted on UseNet. Doesn't matter what it is about. > Within three posts in a thread you will be accused of being a "fuckwit", > quickly followed by all manner of abuse. Then if you are really unlucky you > may start to receive the same degree of unwanted attention some of us have > had to endure. The above examples are but merely a small sample of what > Phil is capable of. :-( > > Cheers, > Alan > Sad but very true :-( BTW I was actually surprised at the search results of "autistic" as well. I know he used it often but 836 times! This is one sick puppy we're dealing with here :-(. Cheers TT
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Scott Dorsey
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:00
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:00
11 lines
1510 bytes
1510 bytes
TT <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote: > >This is one sick puppy we're dealing with here :-(. The get-well cards that some rec.audio.pro folks sent from the AES show weren't appreciated, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 23:45
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 23:45
17 lines
1672 bytes
1672 bytes
"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message news:esudmb$f44$1@panix2.panix.com... > TT <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote: > > > >This is one sick puppy we're dealing with here :-(. > > The get-well cards that some rec.audio.pro folks sent from the AES show > weren't appreciated, though. > --scott > I have suggested on numerous occasions that he seek professional help and if all else fails to seek the services of someone like Dr. Kevorkian ;-) Cheers TT
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: roughplanet
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 06:01
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 06:01
25 lines
2104 bytes
2104 bytes
"TT" <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote in message news:45f33589@quokka.wn.com.au... "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message news:esudmb$f44$1@panix2.panix.com... TT <TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote: > > >This is one sick puppy we're dealing with here :-(. > > The get-well cards that some rec.audio.pro folks sent from > > the AES show weren't appreciated, though. > > --scott > I have suggested on numerous occasions that he seek > professional help and if all else fails to seek the services > of someone like Dr. Kevorkian ;-) No need. I'll provide the same service, free of charge. In fact I'll even pay him if he signs a document exonerating me from any legal libility & agreeing to my euthanasing him, albeit V-E-R-Y S-L-O-W-L-Y by numerous heavy blows to the head & body :-). ruff
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark Harriss
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 08:17
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 08:17
3 lines
1588 bytes
1588 bytes
He's off hiding in sci.electronics.design where they are discussing a design of his: this involves abusing university electronics engineers and respected authors of electronics texts.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: roughplanet
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 09:01
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 09:01
13 lines
1788 bytes
1788 bytes
"Mark Harriss" <user@example.net> wrote in message news:45f3bae0@quokka.wn.com.au... > He's off hiding in sci.electronics.design where they are discussing a > design of his: this involves abusing university electronics engineers > and respected authors of electronics texts. Hi Mark. I'm not going to chase him; just give him a hard time when he visits us here and then he'll go somewhere else where the pickins is easier :-). ruff
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Mark Harriss
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 10:28
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 10:28
20 lines
2119 bytes
2119 bytes
roughplanet wrote: > "Mark Harriss" <user@example.net> wrote in message > news:45f3bae0@quokka.wn.com.au... > >> He's off hiding in sci.electronics.design where they are discussing a >> design of his: this involves abusing university electronics engineers >> and respected authors of electronics texts. > > Hi Mark. > > I'm not going to chase him; just give him a hard time when he visits us here > and then he'll go somewhere else where the pickins is easier :-). > > ruff > > My apologies Ruff, I replied to the wrong thread......Although he does seem to be scarce around here at the moment, maybe it's working.
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: TT
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:26
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:26
16 lines
1829 bytes
1829 bytes
"Mark Harriss" <user@example.net> wrote in message news:45f3d9ae@quokka.wn.com.au... : Although he does : seem to be scarce around here at the moment, maybe it's working. Several reasons for that. He is losing an argument, he is being proved wrong, he is copping what he gives out and finally no one is taking any of his bullying! So like the little girl he is he has run away and hid ;-) Oh and the Moon is waning ;-) Cheers TT
Re: A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
Author: Walter Bushell
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:52
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:52
27 lines
2596 bytes
2596 bytes
In article <B5SdnTdIa-VnjXLYnZ2dnUVZ_trinZ2d@comcast.com>, "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote: > "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote in message > news:558h2nF2377dbU1@mid.individual.net > > "David Grant" wrote ... > > >> Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm > >> and we have a relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. > >> He recently brought in a Monster power-conditioner and > >> demoed it for some of the staff in the office, stating > >> afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our > >> projects. While such equipment can help in specific > >> situations he obviously didn't understand the theory > >> behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great salesman > >> (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design > >> work. > > > Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen. > > You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive > > practices, but maybe they are in denial. :-) > > IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have a > strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as one > can know too much to be an effective salesman. Might blurt out the _truth_.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads