Optical cable or hdmi? - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 144 Old 05-09-2014, 10:45 PM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Yeh, you tell him. Oh wait, you are shooting at me! biggrin.gif

Take a look at this measurement:

i-bs5DqCC-X2.png

This is a special measurement that shows how well the DAC filters incoming jitter. The input to the DAC always has jitter. The jitter can be from the source, the cable, or inside the box. Here we measure how well the DAC filters jitter that would manifests itself in the audio band. As I have indicated on the graph, the lower the graph, the better the filtering.

Note that this is using S/PDIF interface. Despite being the better implemented input on the AVRs, they all do exceedingly poor here. Some even amplify the incoming jitter! Now we see why HDMI performance is poor in these products. When we use HDMI tons of circuits inside the AVR become active to deal with video and rich set of features in that interface. Since the DACs in AVRs have poor rejection/filtering of incoming jitter, all of that activity bleeds into them resulting in distortion in the output of their digital to audio converter (DAC).

The units that do better are all "high-end" products. First is the Lexicon 12B, a now obsolete processor costing $12K. Notice how it beats all the mass market (premium) AVRs that were released later than it.

Lower down yet and by a good margin is the Mark Levinson No 502 which retailed for $30K. Another obsolete product that predated these AVRs. Yet is performs superbly in rejecting jitter. No wonder then that its HDMI performance is also leaps and bounds better than mass market AVRs.

Way, way lower at the bottom is my dedicated Mark Levinson DAC No 36S. This thing eats jitter for breakfast biggrin.gif.I bought this i think in year 2000. So it was 12 years old at the time of this test. Yet, it shows superlative performance in how it rejects incoming jitter. Excellent engineering comes right through the measurements despite it being more than a decade older than the AVRs tested.

Note that the lower the graph, the less the source device can impact the performance of the downstream DAC. Provide no filtering as in the case of AVRs and your performance will be source dependant. Therefore, to get good performance out of these AVRs, you better have low jitter output sources.

Now you see why a $20,000 instrument is helpful in this regard. It enables one to gain key insight as to why the measurements were as bad as they were when using HDMI in AVRs. Without such a system you would have no idea what is going on. With it, we can objectively categorize products and learn to separate good engineering from sloppy.

So you pegged "mass market AVR's" at a 0db. "0db" of what, exactly?
koturban is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 08:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post

So you pegged "mass market AVR's" at a 0db. "0db" of what, exactly?
I didn't peg anything. The device did it itself. I assumed you were familiar with what a decibel is. My bad. Let me explain that. Here is the formula:

5f8b700ca317de618c7dfe810fa205f3.png

As I explained the test measures how much filtering the device performs at each induced jitter frequency. If the device does not filter anything at all, the input and output voltages will be the same giving us V1 = V0. That would make their ratio equal to 1. If you take of log of 1 you get 0. Multiplying that by 20 still gets you 0. So our db value will be zero for a device that is not attenuating input jitter at that frequency. Since jitter is unwanted signal, getting 0 db is bad as I noted on the graph.

Now let's say the device filtered 90% of the input jitter leaving us 10%. Now the ratio is 10/100 and the log of that would be -1. Multiplying that by 20 we get -20 db. So negative numbers are "good." They indicate reduction of input jitter. And the more negative the value, the better it is.

The test simply generates jitter at the frequencies plotted on the graph and measures the strength of what it sees at the analog output of the device and plots it. If there was no attenuation, it will plot it as 0 db as I computed above.

If this is still not clear, please ask.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #123 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 09:03 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,343
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 475 Post(s)
Liked: 832
What does it matter? Jitter isn't audible anyway.
FMW is offline  
post #124 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 09:04 AM
 
mc2ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

What does it matter? Jitter isn't audible anyway.


Amir, please don't take this bate...:)

mc2ed is offline  
post #125 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 09:10 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I didn't peg anything. The device did it itself. I assumed you were familiar with what a decibel is. My bad. Let me explain that. Here is the formula:

5f8b700ca317de618c7dfe810fa205f3.png

As I explained the test measures how much filtering the device performs at each induced jitter frequency. If the device does not filter anything at all, the input and output voltages will be the same giving us V1 = V0. That would make their ratio equal to 1. If you take of log of 1 you get 0. Multiplying that by 20 still gets you 0. So our db value will be zero for a device that is not attenuating input jitter at that frequency. Since jitter is unwanted signal, getting 0 db is bad as I noted on the graph.

Now let's say the device filtered 90% of the input jitter leaving us 10%. Now the ratio is 10/100 and the log of that would be -1. Multiplying that by 20 we get -20 db. So negative numbers are "good." They indicate reduction of input jitter. And the more negative the value, the better it is.

The test simply generates jitter at the frequencies plotted on the graph and measures the strength of what it sees at the analog output of the device and plots it. If there was no attenuation, it will plot it as 0 db as I computed above.

If this is still not clear, please ask.

I don't need the math lesson. I'm perfectly aware of what a db is. It's a meaningless number if it's inaudible, which it is.

eta: How about listing V(x)?
koturban is offline  
post #126 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 09:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post

I don't need the math lesson.
I am sorry but I was simply answering your question of why I 'pegged the AVRs at 0 db." I didn't do that. The machines filtered nothing of input jitter and the math simply leads to 0 db. If that is understood, why challenge me on that point?
Quote:
I'm perfectly aware of what a db is. It's a meaningless number if it's inaudible, which it is.
That test was of diagnostic nature. It reveals the design of the system. It wasn't meant to address what is or is not audible. To use a car analogy, it was measuring how much of a bump to the wheel gets transmitted to your seat.. 0 db means all of it. A negative number means a lot less of it.
Quote:
eta: How about listing V(x)?
Come again? I thought you said you knew what db was??? Please read my previous post.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #127 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 09:42 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I am sorry but I was simply answering your question of why I 'pegged the AVRs at 0 db." I didn't do that. The machines filtered nothing of input jitter and the math simply leads to 0 db. If that is understood, why challenge me on that point?
That test was of diagnostic nature. It reveals the design of the system. It wasn't meant to address what is or is not audible. To use a car analogy, it was measuring how much of a bump to the wheel gets transmitted to your seat.. 0 db means all of it. A negative number means a lot less of it.
Come again? I thought you said you knew what db was??? Please read my previous post.

The decibel, for the most part, is a ratio. Without listing the absolute voltages (V (x) )that make up your graphs, "0db" has no context. The ML may be "great" but at what voltage is it?

Since you like analogies, it's like filtering out a mouse fart in a hurricane.
koturban is offline  
post #128 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 10:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post

The decibel, for the most part, is a ratio.
Most part? No, it *is* a ratio. It always is.
Quote:
Without listing the absolute voltages (V (x) )that make up your graphs, "0db" has no context.
Of course it does. It says that the filter provided no attenuation. If I put in 1 volt, I get out 1 volt. If I put in 10 volts, I get 10 volts. That is the reason db is used. It gives us information that is invariant of what the input or output voltages are.
Quote:
The ML may be "great" but at what voltage is it?
We don't care about the voltage in this situation. We only care about attenuation. Maybe an analogy would help.

Let's look at the common crossover settings in your AVR for the mains and sub:

fig2.jpg

Look to the left. It is a db scale. Not voltage values. dB scale tells us everything we need to know. In this situation, where the graphs cross "-6 db" line, is the frequency that is stated in Hertz. So 80 Hz means the response is down -6 db at 80 Hz for both low and high pass filters.

In our situation, the DAC in your AVR *must* have a low-pass filter. Incoming signal no matter how clean will change in time. If we did not filter out at least some of that, we may fail to detect the correct bits and actually get data errors. The filtering in the extracted timing allows us to ignore a lot of the variations so that we can correctly extract the right bits. The filter is a simple low pass filter just like your sub crossover filter in the AVR. It also has a -3 db point at some frequency. The test that I showed you samples that filter starting at 20 Hz and ending at 10 Khz. If the input and output are the same, it means that the -3 db point (so called "corner frequency") is well above the audio band. Or else we would see some attenuation on the way down to -3 db point. For the sake of discussion, the -3 db point may be 50 Khz. That would still let the DAC extract the correct bits, but will allow that "jitter" to get through the DAC. When that happens, we get sidebands that are in audio band.

The question you are asking with respect to what their voltage is, was addressed in the other graphs I showed where their amplitude relative to full scale can be read. It is not applicable to this measurement.
Quote:
Since you like analogies, it's like filtering out a mouse fart in a hurricane.
Could be smile.gif. Our challenge then is to prove it is a mouse fart and that we are in a hurricane. Measurements are the first critical step in that direction.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #129 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 11:02 AM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Here is the ancient Mark Levinson 502 Processor compared to the Anthem with both being tested using HDMI:



Look at how it outperforms the Anthem across the board -- both as far as noise level and distortions. Once we have this level of performance then you can use either interface and be fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Yeh, you tell him. Oh wait, you are shooting at me! biggrin.gif

Take a look at this measurement:

i-bs5DqCC-X2.png

This is a special measurement that shows how well the DAC filters incoming jitter. The input to the DAC always has jitter. The jitter can be from the source, the cable, or inside the box. Here we measure how well the DAC filters jitter that would manifests itself in the audio band. As I have indicated on the graph, the lower the graph, the better the filtering.

Note that this is using S/PDIF interface. Despite being the better implemented input on the AVRs, they all do exceedingly poor here. Some even amplify the incoming jitter! Now we see why HDMI performance is poor in these products. When we use HDMI tons of circuits inside the AVR become active to deal with video and rich set of features in that interface. Since the DACs in AVRs have poor rejection/filtering of incoming jitter, all of that activity bleeds into them resulting in distortion in the output of their digital to audio converter (DAC).

The units that do better are all "high-end" products. First is the Lexicon 12B, a now obsolete processor costing $12K. Notice how it beats all the mass market (premium) AVRs that were released later than it.

Lower down yet and by a good margin is the Mark Levinson No 502 which retailed for $30K. Another obsolete product that predated these AVRs. Yet is performs superbly in rejecting jitter. No wonder then that its HDMI performance is also leaps and bounds better than mass market AVRs.

Way, way lower at the bottom is my dedicated Mark Levinson DAC No 36S. This thing eats jitter for breakfast biggrin.gif.I bought this i think in year 2000. So it was 12 years old at the time of this test. Yet, it shows superlative performance in how it rejects incoming jitter. Excellent engineering comes right through the measurements despite it being more than a decade older than the AVRs tested.

Note that the lower the graph, the less the source device can impact the performance of the downstream DAC. Provide no filtering as in the case of AVRs and your performance will be source dependant. Therefore, to get good performance out of these AVRs, you better have low jitter output sources.

Now you see why a $20,000 instrument is helpful in this regard. It enables one to gain key insight as to why the measurements were as bad as they were when using HDMI in AVRs. Without such a system you would have no idea what is going on. With it, we can objectively categorize products and learn to separate good engineering from sloppy.
Two words, sales pitch.

What you are doing is not allowed. Did you bother to read the terms of the service for this forum before joining? Here is the relevant part: http://www.avsforum.com/a/terms-of-service

"Special Note to dealers, re-sellers, or any person or company that deals in equipment or products for sale. AVS Forum does provide structured opportunities for community engagement by dealers and manufacturers. Please contact advertise@avsforum.com for more information."
spkr is offline  
post #130 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post

The decibel, for the most part, is a ratio. Without listing the absolute voltages (V (x) )that make up your graphs, "0db" has no context. The ML may be "great" but at what voltage is it?

Since you like analogies, it's like filtering out a mouse fart in a hurricane.

Amir is omitting how much jitter and the nature of it is artificially induced by the test signal. Such gross jitter isn't coming from players so mass market avr are perfectly fine.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #131 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 11:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post

Amir is omitting how much jitter and the nature of it is artificially induced by the test signal. Such gross jitter isn't coming from players so mass market avr are perfectly fine.
Once more, the previous graphs I showed clearly indicated the levels of jitter. I post the latest graph because it was said that expensive test measurement systems offer no value in this discussion. I demonstrated that it does help us characterize the performance of jitter filter in the product. Importantly, you cannot generate jitter on demand using the equipment you have at hand. You do need the $20K piece of equipment.

As to players not having gross jitter, that misses the point. The AVRs seem perfectly capable of introducing their own jitter and distortion by mere fact of using the HDMI input instead of S/PDIF! The latest measurements show why. To the extent the AVR does not filter jitter effectively, HDMI circuits bleed into the DAC and generate distortions.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #132 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 11:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr View Post


Two words, sales pitch.

What you are doing is not allowed. Did you bother to read the terms of the service for this forum before joining? Here is the relevant part: http://www.avsforum.com/a/terms-of-service

"Special Note to dealers, re-sellers, or any person or company that deals in equipment or products for sale. AVS Forum does provide structured opportunities for community engagement by dealers and manufacturers. Please contact advertise@avsforum.com for more information."
Thanks for your concern. But I offered no product for sale. Indeed, you can't even buy the best performing units even if you wanted. I was pretty clear that they were all obsolete. The Mark Levinson DAC is 14 years old and was probably discontinued 10 years ago. The Lexicon 12b likewise is obsolete since it doesn't have HDMI. You may be able to buy restocked Mark Levinson 502s but I don't know anyone who has. We have one demo unit that I used for this testing and have never sold any.

What you can buy are the AVRs which didn't perform well. But even there, I personally own them all and I am not offering them for anyone to buy as I need them for future testing.

Also note that all of these measurements and message behind them were published by the Widescreen Review Magazine. As such, it passed their filter, pun intended smile.gif, as far as being sales literature as opposed to data that their readers could use.

Again, thanks for your concern. It doesn't apply in this situation but good to have you on the watch smile.gif.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #133 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 12:00 PM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Most part? No, it *is* a ratio. It always is.
Of course it does. It says that the filter provided no attenuation. If I put in 1 volt, I get out 1 volt. If I put in 10 volts, I get 10 volts. That is the reason db is used. It gives us information that is invariant of what the input or output voltages are.
We don't care about the voltage in this situation. We only care about attenuation. Maybe an analogy would help.

Let's look at the common crossover settings in your AVR for the mains and sub:

fig2.jpg

Look to the left. It is a db scale. Not voltage values. dB scale tells us everything we need to know. In this situation, where the graphs cross "-6 db" line, is the frequency that is stated in Hertz. So 80 Hz means the response is down -6 db at 80 Hz for both low and high pass filters.

In our situation, the DAC in your AVR *must* have a low-pass filter. Incoming signal no matter how clean will change in time. If we did not filter out at least some of that, we may fail to detect the correct bits and actually get data errors. The filtering in the extracted timing allows us to ignore a lot of the variations so that we can correctly extract the right bits. The filter is a simple low pass filter just like your sub crossover filter in the AVR. It also has a -3 db point at some frequency. The test that I showed you samples that filter starting at 20 Hz and ending at 10 Khz. If the input and output are the same, it means that the -3 db point (so called "corner frequency") is well above the audio band. Or else we would see some attenuation on the way down to -3 db point. For the sake of discussion, the -3 db point may be 50 Khz. That would still let the DAC extract the correct bits, but will allow that "jitter" to get through the DAC. When that happens, we get sidebands that are in audio band.

The question you are asking with respect to what their voltage is, was addressed in the other graphs I showed where their amplitude relative to full scale can be read. It is not applicable to this measurement.
Could be smile.gif. Our challenge then is to prove it is a mouse fart and that we are in a hurricane. Measurements are the first critical step in that direction.

It's a ratio. Glad we are in agreement. So when comparing "jitter reduction" it helps to give it context, for which you continue to beat around the bush.

It's easy to prove its a mouse fart. Just cough up the voltage levels.
koturban is offline  
post #134 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 12:08 PM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Once more, the previous graphs I showed clearly indicated the levels of jitter. I post the latest graph because it was said that expensive test measurement systems offer no value in this discussion. I demonstrated that it does help us characterize the performance of jitter filter in the product. Importantly, you cannot generate jitter on demand using the equipment you have at hand. You do need the $20K piece of equipment.

As to players not having gross jitter, that misses the point. The AVRs seem perfectly capable of introducing their own jitter and distortion by mere fact of using the HDMI input instead of S/PDIF! The latest measurements show why. To the extent the AVR does not filter jitter effectively, HDMI circuits bleed into the DAC and generate distortions.

Who said test equipment doesn't have value? Giving the monetary value of said equipment is irrelevant, and comes off as desperate on your part.
koturban is offline  
post #135 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 12:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,662
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by mc2ed View Post


Amir, please don't take this bate...smile.gif

Yale dude... it's "bait".
Ratman is offline  
post #136 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Thanks for your concern. But I offered no product for sale. Indeed, you can't even buy the best performing units even if you wanted. I was pretty clear that they were all obsolete. The Mark Levinson DAC is 14 years old and was probably discontinued 10 years ago. The Lexicon 12b likewise is obsolete since it doesn't have HDMI. You may be able to buy restocked Mark Levinson 502s but I don't know anyone who has. We have one demo unit that I used for this testing and have never sold any.

What you can buy are the AVRs which didn't perform well. But even there, I personally own them all and I am not offering them for anyone to buy as I need them for future testing.

Also note that all of these measurements and message behind them were published by the Widescreen Review Magazine. As such, it passed their filter, pun intended smile.gif, as far as being sales literature as opposed to data that their readers could use.

Again, thanks for your concern.
Once again, the high distortion between input and output continues. rolleyes.gif
Quote:
It doesn't apply in this situation but good to have you on the watch smile.gif.
It totally applies to what you posted. You praised 2 brands that you sell. You (dealers, re-sellers, or any person or company that deals in equipment or products for sale) are supposed to have it run through AVS advertisement authority. This is cheating. rolleyes.gif
spkr is offline  
post #137 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 03:23 PM
 
SAM64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,592
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

Yale dude... it's "bait".

I think he probably went to 'yail'
SAM64 is offline  
post #138 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 03:42 PM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,343
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 475 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by mc2ed View Post


Amir, please don't take this bate...smile.gif

That would be bait. It isn't bait. It is a statement of fact determined through my group's bias controlled testing. But I can't read what Amir writes anyway unless someone quotes him. I have him blocked.
FMW is offline  
post #139 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:00 PM
 
Reid F Guenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


It costs very little to do a really bad listening test comparing the two. Doing a good bias controlled listening test comparing coax versus HDMI seems to be a task that the above post's author may have been avoiding on the stated grounds of great difficulty, for several years.

I could set one up in a heartbeat (actually maybe a few hours), but I'm a critic not an advocate and that makes me the exactly wrong person to do so.

Funny way of communicating your last sentence made me laugh. 

Reid F Guenly is offline  
post #140 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:21 PM
 
Reid F Guenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post


Yup! biggrin.gif

Can't this UFC match take place at Amir's playground (forum)? rolleyes.gif

What he has his own forum? What's it called? Thanks

Reid F Guenly is offline  
post #141 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:24 PM
 
Reid F Guenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post


That would be bait. It isn't bait. It is a statement of fact determined through my group's bias controlled testing. But I can't read what Amir writes anyway unless someone quotes him. I have him blocked.

Did you block the other guy too?

Reid F Guenly is offline  
post #142 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:33 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,662
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Creating a new name/login doesn't change anything mc2ed.
beaveav likes this.
Ratman is offline  
post #143 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
beaveav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,918
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

Creating a new name/login doesn't change anything mc2ed.

You mean mc2ed/Guy Friendly... rolleyes.gif
andyc56 likes this.

For every new thing I learn, I forget two things I used to know.
beaveav is offline  
post #144 of 144 Old 05-10-2014, 04:46 PM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 23,101
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 489
time

please take the high road in every post
if you see a problematic post, please do not quote it or respond to it: report it to the mods to handle
markrubin is offline  
Closed Thread Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off