Whats new at CES '99 - EAD TheaterMaster 2000 - EAD TheaterMaster 2000 amp.jpg [0/1]
Steve Zipser
processors on the market according to all the reviewers is now releasing
the matching power amplifier - the TheaterMaster 2000! The EAD
Theatermaster is the ultimate home theater amplifier - producing an
incredible 400 WATTS PER CHANNEL into 8 ohms with all five channels
driven!
Here is the company description, specs and a little picture:
To meet the formidable power requirements of high?end home theater, EAD
has developed PowerMaster?a remarkable line of high?performance power
amplifiers. These amplifiers combine ultra?low distortion with
prodigious power output capabilities. The crucial importance of these
characteristics?and the technologies employed to realize them?are
explained below:
400 Watts per channel of clean, continuous power: The single most
important feature of a multi?channel home theater amplifier is abundant,
clean power. Our research has revealed the remarkable fact that most
home theater amplifiers are driven into clipping most of the time! This
is because modern movie soundtracks, such as Dolby Digital soundtracks,
typically allow a full 2 5 dB (a factor of 3 00!) dynamic range between
dialog and loud dynamic passages. Most amps run out of power long before
such peak levels are achieved.
This causes clipping???a condition where the peaks of the musical
waveforms are cut off due to the amplifier's limited power output
capability. Severe clipping causes acute distortion, which can be
dangerous to a tweeter as well as an affront to the ears. However, even
mild, occasional clipping causes listener fatigue, and robs the music or
soundtrack of its dynamics. The PowerMaster 2000 is virtually immune to
clipping due to it's prodigious power output capability. It is capable of
delivering 400 watts rms per channel of continuous power into 8 ohms,
with all five channels driven. This is nearly three Horsepower of
continuous sound!
Into 4ohm loads, PowerMaster's power output capability effortlessly
climbs to 800 watts per channel! And a staggering 1000 watts per channel
into low impedance loads! This is possible, in part, due to 70 pounds
of high?efficiency aluminum convective (read silent!) heatsinking, plus
an enormous, high?speed three Horsepower power supply.
This prodigious power output capability, combined with large dynamic
headroom, virtually ensures that PowerMaster will never clip?even during
the loudest musical peaks. This fact is partly responsible for
PowerMaster's effortless authority, sense of ease, and shear musicality
under all circumstances and with all source material.
AccuLinearO design: PowerMaster 2000 utilizes EAD's AccuLlnear analog
design philosophy. Acculinear ensures that PowerMaster's input circuitry
is never driven beyond its linear operating range?even with full
amplitude signals at the highest possible (20 kHz) audio frequencies.
For this reason, PowerMaster will never distort, nor approach slew?rate
limiting, under any circumstance! While most amplifiers specify a "power
bandwidth" that is considerably less than 20 kHz, PowerMaster will
deliver its enormous, full?rated output power across the entire audio
spectrum, This guarantees linear performance?and negligible
distortion?under all circumstances, contributing further to PowerMaster's
unique sense of effortless authority, musicality, and grace.
Dynamic energy steering: To achieve acceptable performance specifications
for channel separation (i.e., low inter?channel cross talk), some
manufactures have been forced to provide separate power supplies for each
channel. This, unfortunately, imposes a strict limit on the power
available to any given channel, defeating the classic advantages of a
common, large power supply.
In a five?channel amplifier, separate supplies add considerable expense,
which generally means that none of the individual supplies are beefy
enough to provide adequate power output or dynamic headroom to avoid
clipping and distortion on loud passages. PowerMaster has naturally low
inter?channel cross talk, and thus eliminates the need for separate power
supplies. This allows a common, enormous three Horsepower supply, with a
2000 VA ultra?premium, ultra?quiet toroidal transformer, and 112 million
micro?farads of computer?grade, high?speed power supply capacitance. This
provides a nearly unlimited reservoir of power, which can be tapped by
any or all channels on an as?needed basis. This "dynamic energy
steering" (common supply) design is capable of supplying enough power to
a given channel to achieve 1000 watts of power into low?impedance loads!
Such performance could never be achieved by five individual supplies. Nor
can individual power supplies match the speed (sonic detail and grace) of
a single supply.
Moreover, during stereo playback, dynamic energy steering effectively
transforms the PowerMaster 2000 into a 2000 watt ultra?bigb?end
two?channel amplifier!
How do we achieve low inter?channel cross talk?
PowerMaster achieves low inter?channel cross talk?and eliminates the need
for individual supplies?through exceptional "power?supply rejection" in
its five amplifier modules. This is accomplished through ultra?high speed
(megahertz!) componentry coupled with ultra?fast feedback. This
instantaneous feedback ensures true, linear (distortion?free) performance
well beyond the audio bandwidth. The use of premium, state?of?the?art
ultra?high?speed components?combined with strict adherence to rigorous
design principles (e.g., AccuLinear design with microwavespeed circuit
board layouts)?ensures that PowerMaster, even when over driven (which is
nearly impossible), clips gracefilly and recovers instantly, adding to
its sense of invincible authority and grace.
*Balanced inputs: PowerMaster preserves separate, symmetrical
amplification of both inverting and non?inverting input signals. This
"true balanced" circuitry achieves the maximum sonic advantages of
balanced operation: common mode noise rejection and cancellation of
nonlinearities throughout the amplification chain.
Other PowerMaster features:
Remote ON/OFF uses standard, 12 Volt trigger signal (connects to
TheaterMaster). Switchable gain.
Rugged design. Protection circuitry safeguards against: overvoltage,
undervoltage, temperature overload, short?circuit and overcurrent
conditions.
Error readout via front?pane. LED.
Ultra?premium, gold?plated RCA input connectors and speaker terminals.
Power?supply optimized for all international voltage standards: 100? 110,
2 2 0 and 240 VAC.
Specifications:
Output Power
8 ohm load (continuous power, all channels
driven) 400 Watts rms
4 ohm load 750 Watts rms
2.5 ohm load > 1000 Watts rms
Frequency Response 10 Hz to 100 kHz 0.1 dB
Full Power Bandwidth > 30 kHz
Peak Output Current (per channel) 45 Amps
Damping Factor 150
Signal to Noise Ratio 110 dB
THD+Noise < 0.03%
MD < 0.01%
Inter?Channel Crosstalk < 100 dB
CMRR @ 50/60 Hz (balanced) > 90 dB
Gain
"Low" 20 dB gain
"Med" 26 dB gain
46High" 32 dB gain
Input Sensitivity
20 dB gain 5.6 Volts rms
26 dB gain 2.8 Volts rms
32 dB gain 1.4 Volts rms
Input Impedance
Single Ended 20 kQ
Balanced 20 W + 20 W
Input Connectors RCA, XLR
AC Line Voltage 100/120/220/240 VAC
(50/60 Hz)
Power Consumption
Full Power 2300 Watts
Idle 120 Watts
Standby 5 Watts
Physical Dimensions 8" x 17" x 23"
Net Weight 115 lbs; 50 kg
--
LETS GO PANTHERS LETS GO JETS
Sunshine Stereo,Inc http://sunshinestereo.com Tel: 305-757-9358
9535 Biscayne Blvd Miami Shores, FL 33138 Fax: 305-757-1367
PASS Rega Miranda CODA Audible Illusions CEC Camelot Parasound
Audio Logic Chiro Benz-Micro Dunlavy NEAR NHT Gallo Zenith Arcane
Mordaunt-Short EAD Vans-Evers Monster/ENTECH ESP Straightwire XLO
Steve Zipser
Trevor Wilson
Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
>EAD, a company that manufactures the best sounding home theater
>processors on the market according to all the reviewers is now releasing
>the matching power amplifier - the TheaterMaster 2000! The EAD
>Theatermaster is the ultimate home theater amplifier - producing an
>incredible 400 WATTS PER CHANNEL into 8 ohms with all five channels
>driven!
<SNIP>
**I'm sure it's an impressive amplifier, but, unless the laws of physics
were repealed yesterday, the specs of this amp are not believable. I'm
afraid that taking such liberties with specs only damages this company's
credibility.
For starters: Power consumption at full power = 2300 Watts.
Power output (all channels driven) = 400 Watts X 5 = 2500 Watts. Then
assuming 75% (optimistic, at best) efficiency, we have a total consumption
of 2500 / 0.75 = 3333.33 Watts. Not many receptacles (single phase) will
tolerate such a load. Let's not even get into low impedances, where the
consumption figures will be comensurately higher again.
Cheers,
Trevor Wilson
http://www.hutch.com.au/~rage
Steve Zipser
In article <369ad...@139.134.5.33>, ra...@hutch.com.au says...
>
> **I'm sure it's an impressive amplifier, but, unless the laws of physics
> were repealed yesterday, the specs of this amp are not believable. I'm
> afraid that taking such liberties with specs only damages this company's
> credibility.
>
> For starters: Power consumption at full power = 2300 Watts.
> Power output (all channels driven) = 400 Watts X 5 = 2500 Watts. Then
> assuming 75% (optimistic, at best) efficiency, we have a total consumption
> of 2500 / 0.75 = 3333.33 Watts. Not many receptacles (single phase) will
> tolerate such a load. Let's not even get into low impedances, where the
> consumption figures will be comensurately higher again.
>
> Cheers,
> Trevor Wilson
> http://www.hutch.com.au/~rage
>
Before you get your panties all bunched up, this was a scan from a copy
of a copy and is only as accurate as Ominipage 8, the OCR software I use
is. I will happily check with them tomorrow on this. In any event, it
was fabulous sounding & should be considered the current king of HT
amplifiers.
Besides, Trevor, don't you also make amplifiers - so aren't you in sort
of competition with them? I think an email first might have been in
order :-)
Cheers
Zip
Trevor Wilson
Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
>Before you get your panties all bunched up, this was a scan from a copy
>of a copy and is only as accurate as Ominipage 8, the OCR software I use
>is. I will happily check with them tomorrow on this. In any event, it
>was fabulous sounding & should be considered the current king of HT
>amplifiers.
>
>Besides, Trevor, don't you also make amplifiers - so aren't you in sort
>of competition with them? I think an email first might have been in
>order :-)
**First off, I made a mistake in my calculations. My appologies to you, EAD
and the group. 400 Watts X 5, is of course, 2000 Watts, not 2500 Watts. No,
I don't make amplifiers. I do sell them, though. None of the amps I sell are
specifically home cinema products. They are straight stereo products. They
are also decidedly high end. I doubt they compete directly with EAD. I also
suspect that they steer clear stating CONTINUOUS power output, preferring to
rate their amplifiers (incorrectly) in RMS Watts. This may allow them to
claim the power output they do.
I accept your explanation about OCR errors. Please check on the specs and
get back. I am always bothered by ANY company that misrepresents it's
products, regardless of who they may be.
Ian McLean
> **First off, I made a mistake in my calculations.
Without an OCR!?
> My appologies to you, EAD
> and the group. 400 Watts X 5, is of course, 2000 Watts, not 2500 Watts. No,
> I don't make amplifiers. I do sell them, though. None of the amps I sell are
> specifically home cinema products. They are straight stereo products. They
> are also decidedly high end.
On what basis? ME? "High End"?
> I doubt they compete directly with EAD.
No doubt. EAD DO make "high end".
Phil
Trevor Wilson wrote:
> Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
> >EAD, a company that manufactures the best sounding home theater
> >processors on the market according to all the reviewers is now releasing
> >the matching power amplifier - the TheaterMaster 2000! The EAD
> >Theatermaster is the ultimate home theater amplifier - producing an
> >incredible 400 WATTS PER CHANNEL into 8 ohms with all five channels
> >driven!
>
> <SNIP>
> **I'm sure it's an impressive amplifier, but, unless the laws of physics
> were repealed yesterday, the specs of this amp are not believable. I'm
> afraid that taking such liberties with specs only damages this company's
> credibility.
>
> For starters: Power consumption at full power = 2300 Watts.
> Power output (all channels driven) = 400 Watts X 5 = 2500 Watts.
Trevor, not to be to unkind but 400 x 5 = 2000 not 2500. This would give the
amp an efficiency of 87%. Pretty good and more possible than the results you
gave although still a pretty high efficiency rating.
Phil
> Then
> assuming 75% (optimistic, at best) efficiency, we have a total consumption
> of 2500 / 0.75 = 3333.33 Watts. Not many receptacles (single phase) will
> tolerate such a load. Let's not even get into low impedances, where the
> consumption figures will be comensurately higher again.
>
Trevor Wilson
Ian McLean wrote in message <369B350D...@bigpond.com>...
>
>On what basis? ME? "High End"?
>
>
>> I doubt they compete directly with EAD.
>
>No doubt. EAD DO make "high end".
**ME have been compared, favourably with most of the conventionally regarded
high end products, here in Australia, for the last 23 years. Brands like
Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Roland Research, Klyne, Spectral,
Swiss Physics, Kebshcul, Pass, Threshold, Gryphon, etc, whilst all being
good products, in thier own right, represent poor value for money (in
Australia) in comparison to ME. What I would term, 'second tier products',
such as: Musical Fidelity, Aragon, Adcom, Parasound, Classe', etc, are not
the class of ME amplifiers. Again, their value for money is better in their
respective coutry of origin, but, not in Australia.
I have not heard the EAD product, so I cannot say how good it is. I am
bothered by some of the advertising claims (if accurate), though. We all
should be.
Steve Zipser
> **ME have been compared, favourably with most of the conventionally regarded
> high end products, here in Australia, for the last 23 years. Brands like
> Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Roland Research, Klyne, Spectral,
> Swiss Physics, Kebshcul, Pass, Threshold, Gryphon, etc, whilst all being
> good products, in thier own right, represent poor value for money (in
> Australia) in comparison to ME. What I would term, 'second tier products',
> such as: Musical Fidelity, Aragon, Adcom, Parasound, Classe', etc, are not
> the class of ME amplifiers. Again, their value for money is better in their
> respective coutry of origin, but, not in Australia.
>
> I have not heard the EAD product, so I cannot say how good it is. I am
> bothered by some of the advertising claims (if accurate), though. We all
> should be.
Trevor:
I have no doubt that your amplifiers are excellent and as good as you say
they are. So stop kvetching about EAD! You got your numbers wrong in
the first place!
Zip
Trevor Wilson
Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
>Trevor:
>I have no doubt that your amplifiers are excellent and as good as you say
>they are. So stop kvetching about EAD! You got your numbers wrong in
>the first place!
>Zip
**As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means, I'll stop doing it. I
would also like to see an accurate set of numbers relating the EAD product.
Steve Zipser
>
>
>
> Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
>
> >Trevor:
> >I have no doubt that your amplifiers are excellent and as good as you say
> >they are. So stop kvetching about EAD! You got your numbers wrong in
> >the first place!
> >Zip
>
>
> **As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means, I'll stop doing it. I
> would also like to see an accurate set of numbers relating the EAD product.
Kvetching - also hoching, mitchering, nudging - all yiddish terms that
mean complaining, whining, etc - but the English is just not descriptive
enough ;-)
Cheers
Zip
Ian McLean
> **ME have been compared, favourably with most of the conventionally regarded
> high end products, here in Australia, for the last 23 years. Brands like
> Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Roland Research, Klyne, Spectral,
> Swiss Physics, Kebshcul, Pass, Threshold, Gryphon, etc, whilst all being
> good products, in thier own right, represent poor value for money (in
> Australia) in comparison to ME.
On what basis? The fact that you sell ME? Or, because you don't sell the others?
> What I would term, 'second tier products',
> such as: Musical Fidelity, Aragon, Adcom, Parasound, Classe', etc, are not
> the class of ME amplifiers.
What are you suggesting? That ME is "third tier"?
> Again, their value for money is better in their
> respective coutry of origin, but, not in Australia.
Which, of course is why so many more units of some of those brands that you
mention are sold in Australia than ME. So, are you therefore suggesting that
Australian consumers are mostly fools? With, of course the exception being those
that do buy ME? If the "value-for-money" differential was as starkly there as
you purport, then sales would be very different.
> I have not heard the EAD product, so I cannot say how good it is. I am
> bothered by some of the advertising claims (if accurate), though. We all
> should be.
Why? Because they would be earth shatteringly good? Advertising claims, like
documented specifications, do not indicate sound quality. Surely that will be
the only worthwhile criteria. And, of course, if a reputable review
substantiates the specs then you would no doubt like that as well?
Ian McLean
Trevor Wilson
Ian McLean wrote in message <369C9CAB...@bigpond.com>... But,
seemingly with some kind of axe to grind, but I will answer as ususal,
anyway.
>
>On what basis? The fact that you sell ME?
**I sell ME. that is no secret.
Or, because you don't sell the others?
**I have sold some of the brands mentioned. I have serviced almost all of
them at some time. I have listened to all the brands mentioned in comparison
to appropriately matched ME products. I choose to sell ME for many reasons.
High up the list is ME's consistent attitude to sound quality, honesty,
dedication to past and present consumers, longevity (in design and practice)
and exceptional value for money. In Australia, most of the brands mentioned
are WAY behind in the value for money stakes. In their respective countries
of origin, things are a little different, however.
>
>What are you suggesting? That ME is "third tier"?
**I am comfortable with the notion that ME products are competitve with the
very best that is produced anywhere on this planet.
>
>
>> Again, their value for money is better in their
>> respective coutry of origin, but, not in Australia.
>
>Which, of course is why so many more units of some of those brands that you
>mention are sold in Australia than ME.
**I would be interested in seeing the figures you have to back up that
claim.
So, are you therefore suggesting that
>Australian consumers are mostly fools?
**Certainly not. Australian consumers, like most consumers, feel comforatble
with a household name. Witness the popularity of Bose, for instance. It has
nothing to do with the sound quality, but everything to do with marketing. I
would suggest that at the mid to top end of the ME product range, ME
outsells all the high end brands (in Australia). In fact, some of the
employees of the importers of those products own ME products. They know
value for money when they see it. At least four of the importers of high end
products into Australia have requested (on numerous occaisions) to be able
to sell ME products. Three have offered to export it. Why is that, do you
think? Australians buy overseas manufactured high end products for many
reasons, but, like the VHS - Beta war of a decade ago, advertising wins out.
Australians buy more imported magazines than the local product. They see ads
for Krell, Audio Research, et al. Of course many will want to buy those
products. Many have never even heard of ME. That's OK. In a fair and honest
demo, I can sell ME products almost 75% of the time. That's a pretty good
conversion rate. I would put the ME850 up against a 332 ML or equivalent
Krell any day. I would put the ME1400 monos, up against ANY amplifier,
regardless of price. Just this month, I am trading an Audio Research LS9
(anyone want an LS9), a Quad 77, an Audiolab 8000A and hopefully, a small
Gryphon.
With, of course the exception being those
>that do buy ME? If the "value-for-money" differential was as starkly there
as
>you purport, then sales would be very different.
**Not necessarily. Doing business with ME is tough. Payment terms are 10
days nett. Dealers do not like that, they want 60 days and big profit
margins. If dealers do not promote the product, then sales tend to be
somewhat lower than they should be. As well as that, ME changes models very
infrequently. This is an athema to people who have been accustomed to madel
changes every couple of years. They feel the need to change. Nevertheless,
amongst all that, ME sales are, indeed, impressive.
>
>> I have not heard the EAD product, so I cannot say how good it is. I am
>> bothered by some of the advertising claims (if accurate), though. We all
>> should be.
>
>Why? Because they would be earth shatteringly good? Advertising claims,
like
>documented specifications, do not indicate sound quality.
**Not so. Documented specs CAN indicate sound quality. However, more
importantly, inaccurate specs (or outright lies and deception) indicate the
honesty of the company behind that product. Would you buy a vehicle from
Microsoft? A car that stalls two of three times a day. Crashes for no
reason? You get the idea? I agree that specs do not tell the whole story.
The specs that are listed should be accurate and repeatable.
Surely that will be
>the only worthwhile criteria. And, of course, if a reputable review
>substantiates the specs then you would no doubt like that as well?
**If the review sustantiates the specs, then clearly that would be
acceptable.
Ian, you seem to have a vendetta against me and/or ME. Please let me know
what your problem is.
Ian McLean
> Ian, you seem to have a vendetta against me and/or ME. Please let me know
> what your problem is.
ME is a quality product. Where it fits in the scheme of things depends upon the
model.
All that I chose to do was to attempt to 'stir' you given your self interested,
'glass house' (and inaccurate) criticism of something that you hadn't seen or
heard. Not that this is anything new for this group! However, if your sales
shacking situation was as well known as say, Zip, then there would have been a
"SALES SHACK ALERT!"
Two posts hardly makes for a "vendetta" on RAO! 200 maybe. Methinks that you are
being a trifle over dramatic.
Ian McLean
Trevor Wilson
Ian McLean wrote in message <369D1F79...@bigpond.com>...
>ME is a quality product. Where it fits in the scheme of things depends upon
the
>model.
**Agreed.
>
>All that I chose to do was to attempt to 'stir' you given your self
interested,
>'glass house' (and inaccurate) criticism of something that you hadn't seen
or
>heard. Not that this is anything new for this group! However, if your sales
>shacking situation was as well known as say, Zip, then there would have
been a
>"SALES SHACK ALERT!"
**Very probably. I have never shied away from that possibility. I try to be
honest in my comments at all times, even if that involves advocating a
product where no financial gain will occur for me. Please note, very
carefully. I did not criticise ther EAD product. I did criticise their
promotional literature, as placed on the list by Steve. I have never heard
the product. It may be quite brilliant. Equally, there is no reason for any
company to print misleading information about their products.
>
>Two posts hardly makes for a "vendetta" on RAO! 200 maybe. Methinks that
you are
>being a trifle over dramatic.
**Since I rarely recieve flames (except from those who don't actually
listen), I was a little shaken. Since you obviously know the ME product,
then any criticism from you is criticism that I need to take heed of.
Likewise, myself.
WolfGberg
>**As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means, I'll stop doing it. I
>would also like to see an accurate set of numbers relating the EAD product.
>
"Kvetching", according to Wolfie, is the repeated whining and nagging, dredging
up the same thing over and over, until the 'Kvetcher' has the 'Kvethcee'
pulling their hair and they finally give in. There is also, you should know,
advanced kvetching. This is where the kvetcher keeps modulating the frequency
of their voice in a sinusoidal curve until they hit the exact right note that
vibrates your eardrum to the point of agony already.
You want an example? Gene Steinberg is the kvetchiest person here. Whatever you
say, this mishuga kvetches: "But was it blind? Was it double blind?" and so on.
JJ is also kvetchy. Kruger is not kvetchy. Only a mamser farbissiner bastard.
For the translation of this, you will have to send a check.
Wolfgang Goldberg
Tom Melanson
either.
Tom
Steve Zipser wrote:
>
> In article <369c0...@139.134.5.33>, ra...@hutch.com.au says...
> >
> >
> >
> > Steve Zipser wrote in message ...
> >
> > >Trevor:
> > >I have no doubt that your amplifiers are excellent and as good as you say
> > >they are. So stop kvetching about EAD! You got your numbers wrong in
> > >the first place!
> > >Zip
> >
> >
> > **As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means, I'll stop doing it. I
> > would also like to see an accurate set of numbers relating the EAD product.
>
> Kvetching - also hoching, mitchering, nudging - all yiddish terms that
> mean complaining, whining, etc - but the English is just not descriptive
> enough ;-)
> Cheers
> Zip
George M. Middius
>**As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means,
It's what Fester does on the subject of vinyl and turntables.
George M. Middius
Remove "jiffy" to reply
~EJP~
WolfGberg wrote in message
<19990114080445...@ng-fd1.aol.com>...
>Kruger is not kvetchy. Only a mamser farbissiner bastard.
>For the translation of this, you will have to send a check.
>
>Wolfgang Goldberg
Instead, howse about I buy you a nice pastrami sandwich the next time
I'm in NYC?
Edward M. Shain
>Trevor asks:
>
>>**As soon as I know what 'kvetching' (Yiddish?) means, I'll stop doing it. I
>>would also like to see an accurate set of numbers relating the EAD product.
>>
>
>"Kvetching", according to Wolfie, is the repeated whining and nagging, dredging
>up the same thing over and over, until the 'Kvetcher' has the 'Kvethcee'
>pulling their hair and they finally give in. There is also, you should know,
>advanced kvetching. This is where the kvetcher keeps modulating the frequency
>of their voice in a sinusoidal curve until they hit the exact right note that
>vibrates your eardrum to the point of agony already.
>
>You want an example? Gene Steinberg is the kvetchiest person here. Whatever you
>say, this mishuga kvetches: "But was it blind? Was it double blind?" and so on.
>JJ is also kvetchy. Kruger is not kvetchy. Only a mamser farbissiner bastard.
>For the translation of this, you will have to send a check.
Wolfie, nobody does it better! ROTFLMAO!!
Ed
jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist
Tom Melanson <win...@ntplx.net> wrote:
>Remember: A kvell is always better than a kvetch and a Krell ain't bad
>either.
>Tom
--
Copyright j...@research.att.com 1998, all rights reserved, except transmission
by USENET and like facilities granted. This notice must be included. Any
use by a provider charging in any way for the IP represented in and by this
article and any inclusion in print or other media are specifically prohibited.
Trevor Wilson
WolfGberg wrote in message <19990114080445.20063.00000581@ng-
<SNIP>
>JJ is also kvetchy. Kruger is not kvetchy. Only a mamser farbissiner
bastard.
>For the translation of this, you will have to send a check.
**The cheque is in the mail. -:)
dctest Anonymous Remailer
>
[SNIPPED: SPAM BROUGHT TO YOU BY WORLDNET.ASS.NET
IRRESPONSIBLE PROVIDER WILLIMG TO KILL USENET
FOR CORPORATE PROFITS]