Geez, Marakanetz, why apologize for opening a can-o-worms with respect to Twl (needlessly, IMHO) and then open another with respect to Rives? Different ballgame, anyway, Rives having product and services to SELL, and Twl not.
That being said, Rives is, by ALL accounts, a straight-shooter and the very soul of discretion who, in addition to offering good and services at a PRICE, also dispenses very helpful tips FREE of charge both in these threads and at his website. In addition, Rives always PRESENTS himself as a seller and does not try to hide behind a moniker to drum up business (which cannot be said for a couple of cable hawkers that I could, but won't, mention). It is wholly unfair to drag him into THIS discussion, though.
In closing my last contribution to what has become a very silly and personally-laced thread, I admit that I agree with Inna in that Twl does NOT need anyone to defend his posts. His longstanding contributions to the site and his furtherance of audio knowledge speaks for itself. Anyone comparing the merits of his posts as compared to certain others within this thread should clearly consider the source. Present company not excepted.
That being said, Rives is, by ALL accounts, a straight-shooter and the very soul of discretion who, in addition to offering good and services at a PRICE, also dispenses very helpful tips FREE of charge both in these threads and at his website. In addition, Rives always PRESENTS himself as a seller and does not try to hide behind a moniker to drum up business (which cannot be said for a couple of cable hawkers that I could, but won't, mention). It is wholly unfair to drag him into THIS discussion, though.
In closing my last contribution to what has become a very silly and personally-laced thread, I admit that I agree with Inna in that Twl does NOT need anyone to defend his posts. His longstanding contributions to the site and his furtherance of audio knowledge speaks for itself. Anyone comparing the merits of his posts as compared to certain others within this thread should clearly consider the source. Present company not excepted.