|
|
Posted by Guest on 11/09/06 05:32
--
This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com
http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
"Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote in message
news:tna5l2lps4c6blrq1591jera07h88llk3r@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:36:26 GMT, "Guest" <llcoolj@comcast.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe you don't test out cables.
>
> Uhh, you don't test out cables, either. You *use* different cables,
> then imagine you hear and/or see a difference. That's not testing;
> that's "fiddling around and convincing yourself you're right,
> regardless of fact".
>
> "Testing" is where you have equipment to *measure* to a quantitative
> scale some objective performance parameter.
>
> Related is "comparing", which is where you have *somebody else* swap
> cables that *you cannot see*, and then try to be able to tell which is
> which. Even harder, hearing/seeing two different cables once each, and
> then trying to tell whether a third viewing/listening matches the
> first or second cable.
>
> You have done none of the above, and therefore I am going to join the
> much more learned folks here who are laughing at your idiocy:
>
> HAHAHAHAHA! What a moron!
>
>
Listen cocksucker, when "I" test shit and "I" see or hear a difference, that
is all that matters. What is written on paper means shit if it does not
translate into real world results. Since you mentioned it, why don't you do
some 'testing?'
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|