Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 1217507" data-attributes="member: 549629">Oh I see, so the fact that you feel my history shows some bias towards RE, any positive mention of an RE product automatically falls under the category of &#039;bashing&#039; the other product? I did not ask for your interpretations of my post history or my intentions, I asked you to produce a quote, from this thread, by me, that &#039;bashed&#039; the Rl-p. You can&#039;t do it, because I didn&#039;t, and you know it. Not to mention, I often times recommend other brands over RE products, depending on the situation. If you&#039;ve read my post history, you&#039;d know that. But you haven&#039;t, you only see what you want to see, like me &#039;bashing&#039; the Rl-p here. What a joke. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gifedit: and where in this thread have I said I have or have not heard an Rl-p? You should stick to commenting on things you know directly, rather than worry about my comments.Where in this thread did I make a comment that needs hearing both? Never answered that question either, did ya?BTW, I have heard an Rl-p now. Nice try, but again you fall short.Let me repost what I originally typed, since you so clearly mis-read it:&quot;Buy another XXX and run them sealed. They will have alot more output than dual Rl-p&#039;s and have excellent SQ. Which would have &#039;better&#039; SQ is personal preference. However to those who say the Rl-p &#039;owns&#039; the xxx in SQ, the xxx outputs less distortion than the Rl-p. Beyond that it will be perseronal preference.&quot;Have a nice day.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 1217507, member: 549629"] Oh I see, so the fact that you feel my history shows some bias towards RE, any positive mention of an RE product automatically falls under the category of 'bashing' the other product? I did not ask for your interpretations of my post history or my intentions, I asked you to produce a quote, from this thread, by me, that 'bashed' the Rl-p. You can't do it, because I didn't, and you know it. Not to mention, I often times recommend other brands over RE products, depending on the situation. If you've read my post history, you'd know that. But you haven't, you only see what you want to see, like me 'bashing' the Rl-p here. What a joke. [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif[/IMG] edit: and where in this thread have I said I have or have not heard an Rl-p? You should stick to commenting on things [B]you[/B] know directly, rather than worry about my comments. Where in this thread did I make a comment that needs hearing both? Never answered that question either, did ya? BTW, I have heard an Rl-p now. Nice try, but again you fall short. Let me repost what I originally typed, since you so clearly mis-read it: "Buy another XXX and run them sealed. They will have alot more output than dual Rl-p's and have excellent SQ. Which would have 'better' SQ is personal preference. However to those who say the Rl-p 'owns' the xxx in SQ, the xxx outputs less distortion than the Rl-p. Beyond that it will be perseronal preference." Have a nice day. [/QUOTE]

Verification