The Sound Of Hard Drive Enclosures
Comments
-
DK,
Why can't you purchase a better power supply with the same voltage/amps and build a cable?
My experience has been very positive with cleaner/faster power supplies.
I always prefer to consult the manufacturer prior doing performance mods or adding electrical accessories. In this case, I might experience some difficulty finding someone in technical support who knows what I am talking about.
DC power supply replacements/upgrades are usually straightforward, but you never know if the manufacturer has a little trick up their sleeve.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
While trying to keep score on this one I think the point [pardon the pun] and game match goes to DK on this one,Although extremely deserving as he obviously put up a long arduous, frustrating ordeal to prove his objective...Kudos Sir!!
-
The crux of the matter is monophonic, stereophonic, binaural, what have you, that you can only train to reduce bias, but not eliminate.
I've read what DK has posted, I read his reasoning behind it, I've read what I could of the Bell labs, Olive/Toole and I have a different read on it and simply don't agree that you can have the same outcome of peoples tallied responses in regards to debiased trained listeners vs truly blinded.
You find me a study that shows that the outcomes are the statistically meaningful as the same then we would have something to talk about. -
Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it."Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
This content has been removed.
-
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....?? -
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....??
I did? I don't recall such behavior. Since I did it "several times", would you be so kind as to refresh my/our memories and post quotes. Thanks.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
I think they believe there is going to be some "Winner". Whoever posts the most google links, or discusses their view to death, is the "Victor".
The burden of proof always lies on those making a claim of something unknown or not usually accepted.
Therefore "Bias removal training"......uhm.
Still waiting to get links to the training seminars, or even a link to how it is done, if self taught etc. -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....??
Except the poster specifically quoted my post and implied (since he was directing the rest of the post at me) I was name calling. He didn't say it in a general way, he said it to me.
Are you unable to fathom how a BB works or what reading comprehension is?
H9
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
-
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....??
Except the poster specifically quoted my post and implied (since he was directing the rest of the post at me) I was name calling. He didn't say it in a general way, he said it to me.
Are you unable to fathom how a BB works or what reading comprehension is?
H9
If I was mistaken, my apologies. I assumed he meant the insults from the previous day. -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....??
Except the poster specifically quoted my post and implied (since he was directing the rest of the post at me) I was name calling. He didn't say it in a general way, he said it to me.
Are you unable to fathom how a BB works or what reading comprehension is?
H9
If I was mistaken, my apologies. I assumed he meant the insults from the previous day.
What do you mean "if"? Read the damn post. What "assumed" name calling from the previous day did I do?
You are a real piece of work. You deflect everything and take responsibility for nothing.
H9
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »
No, I will not, that would only be counter productive.
Translation - "No, I cannot, that would only prove that I am a pathological liar."
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Saying you have a "different read" without supporting it, is like farting in the wind.
Care to expound? I doubt it.
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position. He did not go to the nth degree in documenting, but he did cite the study done at Harmon Kardon and gave a link. He also did not find it necessary to name call and make snarky remarks about others.
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
All he did was take a small portion of something and cut and paste. It's nice when you can take something completely out of context and call it definitive support. Who named called? Please show me where there was name calling.
I can post links all day long. What's your point?
H9
Must be your Bias....! DK name called several times. Are you unable to fathom that....??
Except the poster specifically quoted my post and implied (since he was directing the rest of the post at me) I was name calling. He didn't say it in a general way, he said it to me.
Are you unable to fathom how a BB works or what reading comprehension is?
H9
If I was mistaken, my apologies. I assumed he meant the insults from the previous day.
What do you mean "if"? Read the damn post. What "assumed" name calling from the previous day did I do?
You are a real piece of work. You deflect everything and take responsibility for nothing.
H9
I meant NOT YOU....geez!!! -
This content has been removed.
-
Glad you can speak for others while deflecting your own comments.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
While trying to keep score on this one I think the point [pardon the pun] and game match goes to DK on this one,Although extremely deserving as he obviously put up a long arduous, frustrating ordeal to prove his objective...Kudos Sir!!
I am not trying to "prove" anything. This is just entertainment and sport. As I have documented previously, this topic has been discussed many times before in other threads. The blind test proponents in this thread are using the same tired, worn, misleading, and unscientifically substantiated arguments that were disproved before most of them were born.Absolute_Zero wrote: »The crux of the matter is monophonic, stereophonic, binaural, what have you, that you can only train to reduce bias, but not eliminate.
For the 1,000,001th time, I didn't say bias needed to be eliminated. It is the effect of bias on the decision making process that needs to be eliminated. So sad you can't grasp this simple, basic concept.Absolute_Zero wrote: »I've read what DK has posted, I read his reasoning behind it, I've read what I could of the Bell labs, Olive/Toole and I have a different read on it and simply don't agree that you can have the same outcome of peoples tallied responses in regards to debiased trained listeners vs truly blinded.
You are sounding like a parent who is in deep denial about their child being a ravenous drug addict and serial killer.Absolute_Zero wrote: »You find me a study that shows that the outcomes are the statistically meaningful as the same then we would have something to talk about.
I have already posted links to many sources of credible scientific studies, but you refuse to read and learn. You would rather be hoodwinked by dishonest research that confirms your biases.DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »
Actually, Absoulute Zero has supported his position.
How so?
1. Stereophonic audio is multidimensional sensory stimuli.
2. The peer reviewed sensory science literature has proven that forced choice discrimination test methods, like A/B and A/B/X, are not appropriate for multidimensional stimuli.
3. No one has posted any credible scientific evidence that contravenes 1 and 2 above.
That's all there is to it.DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »
Have you gone to the link Absolute Zero provided and read the article? I did. Very informative. There seems to be no generally accepted and standardized testing methods. Major manufacturers of speakers try them out internally and with people off the street using a variety of testing methods including double blind tests. He has also challenged DKs premise about being able to eliminate-reduce bias in people that know what they are listening to and what playback equipment is being used.
The article is more entertaining and misleading than informative. The following statement:
"While double-blind protocols are standard practice in all fields of science - including consumer testing of food and wine -"
The field of food and wine only uses blind tests with untrained (naive) subjects, and then only in very narrow and specific circumstances. The sensory science literature specifies trained listeners for multidimensional stimuli.
The article said that "Unfortunately, at that time there were no published scientific studies in the audio literature to either support or refute their claims".
This is certainly not true and I posted references to several such studies done long before Olive and Toole's 1994 study.DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »
Here is my point:
The article he referred to is by the man in charge of product testing at HK (including JBL). JBL is one of the largest speaker manufacturers on planet earth. He gave a link to the entire article and only quoted a portion from that article. Just maybe this man that works for HK knows a thing or two about product testing. Just maybe this man is an industry expert on this subject. And the HK product tester advocates for Double Blind Testing.
Or maybe he says whatever to "support" his point. Olive does not even believe stereophonic reproduction is a valid medium and most of his research involves monophonic audio. That alone should tell you a lot about his motives.
His job title is irrelevant. Either what he says is scientifically justified or it is not.
Still waiting to get links to the training seminars, or even a link to how it is done, if self taught etc.
Your level of intellectual laziness is astonishing. You have been told several times that the answer to this question has already been provided in this thread, yet you are still begging for someone to spoon feed you information.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »
Still waiting to get links to the training seminars, or even a link to how it is done, if self taught etc.
Your level of intellectual laziness is astonishing. You have been told several times that the answer to this question has already been provided in this thread, yet you are still begging for someone to spoon feed you information.
[/quote]
So you are unable to just copy and paste or link to this training information?
As I said before, I looked and did not find it.
Starting to think I am gonna pull the curtain back, and not see a wizard!
-
ByeMojo Audio Illuminati v3>>Quantum Byte w/LMS>>Rpi/PiCoreplayer>> Starlight 7 USB >> Mojo Audio Mystique v2 SE>>ModWright SWL 9.0 SE Signature>>Hafler DH-500 Amp+ (Musical Concepts Fully Modded)>>
SRS 2.3TL (Fully Modded)...Velodyne Optimum 8 subwoofer
1KVA Dreadnought
Marantz SA 8005
Pioneer PLX-1000 Turntable - Shure SC35C/N35X - V15III/VN35HE
Yamaha TX-540 Tuner...Sony BDP-S570
Sony PS4
Separate subpanel with four dedicated 20 amp circuits.
1. Amplification 2. Analog 3. Digital 4. Video
"All THAT IS LOST FROM THE SOURCE IS LOST FOREVER" -
As I said before, I looked and did not find it.
Starting to think I am gonna pull the curtain back, and not see a wizard!
Since you obviously saw where I had insulted people "several times", if you post just two quotes where I insulted someone, I will indulge you just this once and repost the training information that apparently is invisible only to you.
Deal?
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
-
Summary
Hardware Store Owner: May I help you?
Customer: I need something to kill flies.
Hardware Store Owner: I've got just what you need: an Acme XR-100 fly swatter, it's fast, lightweight, accurate, and deadly.
Customer: I would prefer to use a big, heavy, sledgehammer. Do you have any in stock?
Hardware Store Owner: Uh, yes, but why do you want to use a sledgehammer to kill house flies?
Customer: A sledgehammer was recommended for killing flies by a lot of Internet web sites, and by Sean Toole, who is an expert on household tools. I'm also going to use the sledgehammer to drive nails and screws into the wall, crush ice, and crack nut shells.
Hardware Store Owner: But why would you want to swing a big heavy sledgehammer when a lightweight swatter is proven to be more accurate, convenient, and effective?
Customer: I want to make sure the fly is dead. I'm not worried about the weight. My next door neighbor is coming over to help me swing the sledge hammer. My neighbor is also going to confirm that the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: Why do you need a neighbor to confirm the fly is dead? Can't you see that for yourself?
Customer: Eyes can be tricked and fooled. At least one other pair of eyes is the only scientifically proven way to be sure the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: It makes no sense to use a sledgehammer to kill a house fly.
Customer: Are you saying that a sledgehammer can't be used to kill a house fly? What scientific proof do you have that a sledgehammer can't be used to kill a house fly?
Hardware Store Owner: No, no, no. That's not the point. Yes you can use a sledgehammer to kill a house fly, but you will miss more times than you will hit, and you will damage your floors, walls, and furniture, and possibly injure yourself. For sure, you will have extra expense to repair whatever you hit besides the fly.
Customer: That's OK. A sledgehammer, plus secondary visual confirmation, is the only scientifically proven way to make sure the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: No, you're wrong. All you need to do is train yourself to accurately hit a target with the swatter and you can be certain the fly is dead if it is splattered on whatever surface its struck.
Customer: Where can I receive this fly swatter training? Can I get a certificate in fly swatting?
Hardware Store Owner: No. You just practice at home hitting a target by yourself. I practiced by tearing off a small corner of a sheet of paper and hitting that as fast as I could.
Customer: Can I use the fly swatter method along with my neighbor to help swing it?
Hardware Store Owner: ??? WHAT ??? Why would you need to your neighbor to help you swing a flyswatter?
Customer: Both of us swinging the swatter would be twice as fast and twice as accurate. Plus, my neighbor would provide confirmation of the kill. You should try it.
Hardware Store Owner: I am not going to ask a neighbor to help me swing a fly swatter and then confirm the fly is dead. That's ridiculous and totally unnecessary.
Customer: What are you afraid of?
Hardware Store Owner: Nothing. One Wilton Bash 10 lb Sledgehammer with 36" unbreakable handle coming right up. That'll be $112.20 with tax.
Customer: Thank you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fNvi6xG-5Y
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
That's funny I don't care who you are.Pio Elete Pro 520
Panamax 5400-EX
Sunfire TGP 5
Micro Seiki DD-40 - Lyra-Dorian and Denon DL-160
PS Audio GCPH phono pre
Sunfire CG 200 X 5
Sunfire CG Sig 405 X 5
OPPO BDP-83 SE
SDA SRS 1.2TL Sonicaps and Mills
Ctr CS1000p
Sur - FX1000 x 4
SUB - SVS PB2-Plus
Workkout room:
Sony Bravia XBR- 32-Inch 1080p
Onkyo TX-DS898
GFA 555
Yamaha DVD-S1800BL/SACD
Ft - SDA 1C
Not being used:
RTi 38's -4
RT55i's - 2
RT25i's -2, using other 2 in shop
LSI 15's
CSi40
PSW 404 -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Summary
Hardware Store Owner: May I help you?
Customer: I need something to kill flies.
Hardware Store Owner: I've got just what you need: an Acme XR-100 fly swatter, it's fast, lightweight, accurate, and deadly.
Customer: I would prefer to use a big, heavy, sledgehammer. Do you have any in stock?
Hardware Store Owner: Uh, yes, but why do you want to use a sledgehammer to kill house flies?
Customer: A sledgehammer was recommended for killing flies by a lot of Internet web sites, and by Sean Toole, who is an expert on household tools. I'm also going to use the sledgehammer to drive nails and screws into the wall, crush ice, and crack nut shells.
Hardware Store Owner: But why would you want to swing a big heavy sledgehammer when a lightweight swatter is proven to be more accurate, convenient, and effective?
Customer: I want to make sure the fly is dead. I'm not worried about the weight. My next door neighbor is coming over to help me swing the sledge hammer. My neighbor is also going to confirm that the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: Why do you need a neighbor to confirm the fly is dead? Can't you see that for yourself?
Customer: Eyes can be tricked and fooled. At least one other pair of eyes is the only scientifically proven way to be sure the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: It makes no sense to use a sledgehammer to kill a house fly.
Customer: Are you saying that a sledgehammer can't be used to kill a house fly? What scientific proof do you have that a sledgehammer can't be used to kill a house fly?
Hardware Store Owner: No, no, no. That's not the point. Yes you can use a sledgehammer to kill a house fly, but you will miss more times than you will hit, and you will damage your floors, walls, and furniture, and possibly injure yourself. For sure, you will have extra expense to repair whatever you hit besides the fly.
Customer: That's OK. A sledgehammer, plus secondary visual confirmation, is the only scientifically proven way to make sure the fly is dead.
Hardware Store Owner: No, you're wrong. All you need to do is train yourself to accurately hit a target with the swatter and you can be certain the fly is dead if it is splattered on whatever surface its struck.
Customer: Where can I receive this fly swatter training? Can I get a certificate in fly swatting?
Hardware Store Owner: No. You just practice at home hitting a target by yourself. I practiced by tearing off a small corner of a sheet of paper and hitting that as fast as I could.
Customer: Can I use the fly swatter method along with my neighbor to help swing it?
Hardware Store Owner: ??? WHAT ??? Why would you need to your neighbor to help you swing a flyswatter?
Customer: Both of us swinging the swatter would be twice as fast and twice as accurate. Plus, my neighbor would provide confirmation of the kill. You should try it.
Hardware Store Owner: I am not going to ask a neighbor to help me swing a fly swatter and then confirm the fly is dead. That's ridiculous and totally unnecessary.
Customer: What are you afraid of?
Hardware Store Owner: Nothing. One Wilton Bash 10 lb Sledgehammer with 36" unbreakable handle coming right up. That'll be $112.20 with tax.
Customer: Thank you.
More like: "I have hearing so good I can snatch a mosquito out of the air with this pair of chop sticks."
Click, I turn off the lights in the room and wish you good luck. -
Absolute_Zero wrote: »
More like: "I have hearing so good I can snatch a mosquito out of the air with this pair of chop sticks."
Click, I turn off the lights in the room and wish you good luck.
I certainly have never claimed to have superhuman hearing. I don't know of any of my audiophile friends or even any members of this forum who have made such an asinine claim.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »don't know of any of my audiophile friends or even any members of this forum who have made such an asinine claim.
Lol. That's funny. Tell another.
-
DarqueKnight wrote: »Absolute_Zero wrote: »
More like: "I have hearing so good I can snatch a mosquito out of the air with this pair of chop sticks."
Click, I turn off the lights in the room and wish you good luck.
I certainly have never claimed to have superhuman hearing. I don't know of any of my audiophile friends or even any members of this forum who have made such an asinine claim.
Tom has......he said he could hear a gnat phart at two hundred yards.
I slapped him. -
Oh well, then, now I know.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Just helping you keep your facts straight, Ray.
My pleasure.
