You are here

Log in or register to post comments
Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Besides I will have no part in banning anyone.

I wasn't asking for anyone to be banned. I was - and have been - asking for a civil discussion and an end to the disruption created by, in this case, one individual. You haven't been in on the years of discussions which have all been derailed in the same manner by mostly the same participants. May has expressed her frustration at every such thread being driven into the ditch in a similar fashion and mostly with the same words. If you go back through the archives, Freako, you'll find this is quite typical and most especially on weekends when SM isn't available. While the cat's away ...

I wasn't asking you to jump on any "Let's ban so and so" bandwagon, I was only asking who would join me in saying we would like to keep a civil discussion going without these same distractions in each and every thread which attempts to discuss something not understood by mainstream thinking and conventional measurements. I was hoping others might feel the same way about every thread being derailed in the same manner so that this thread and May's thread might actually progress beyond the usual stopping point here where threads get shut down due to cat fights between members. You can either allow members to repeatedly abuse the "don't be an asshole" rule or you can step up to say the insults are out of line and unnecessary and as a result of enough people speaking up hopefully the thread can continue forward. I certainly have noticed that one "side" of these threads has never had a problem with calling anyone on the "other side" for what they see as, uh ... "incivility". If necessary, Freako, I can supply context to that statement.

There's my explanation of what I was attempting, now can we get back to the subject of the thread?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

I don't know any other forum that would tolerate this sort of obvious trolling.

I'd say to give David L some slack.

Here, we've had a tweak topic about the ART System bowls; with a manufacturer who is pretty descriptive about his process and creating his product to have certain physical characteristics, resonance frequencies, etc...and he openly describes his product as having an effect on room acoustics...but then the sales trolls start spamming the topic talking over the product to promulgate their own sales biases.

The discussion (and Ted's own product description!) was usurped and turned for the umpteenth time to the realm of Beltism...as certain people ceaselessly do.

David L is merely offering an iconolclastic reply.

As a reader of Stereophile, are you not intrigued why the discussion went from measuring these babies to "Since we don't have a purpose built room, there will be no measurements?"

Ever hear that reason as a reason not to measure other gear in a reviewer's natural habitat?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

I'd say to give David L some slack.

David L is merely offering an iconolclastic reply.

What a howler!! Laughter is the best medicine, here's hoping there are plenty more where that came from.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

Quote:

I'd say to give David L some slack.

David L is merely offering an iconolclastic reply.

What a howler!! Laughter is the best medicine, here's hoping there are plenty more where that came from.

Careful, there, Geoff, EricArjes will get down on you and your pet goat, too...


Quote:

It is classic trolling, intended to create controversy and disturbance.

He summed you up, buddy!

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:
Besides I will have no part in banning anyone.

I wasn't asking for anyone to be banned. I was - and have been - asking for a civil discussion and an end to the disruption created by, in this case, one individual. You haven't been in on the years of discussions which have all been derailed in the same manner by mostly the same participants. May has expressed her frustration at every such thread being driven into the ditch in a similar fashion and mostly with the same words. If you go back through the archives, Freako, you'll find this is quite typical and most especially on weekends when SM isn't available. While the cat's away ...

I wasn't asking you to jump on any "Let's ban so and so" bandwagon, I was only asking who would join me in saying we would like to keep a civil discussion going without these same distractions in each and every thread which attempts to discuss something not understood by mainstream thinking and conventional measurements. I was hoping others might feel the same way about every thread being derailed in the same manner so that this thread and May's thread might actually progress beyond the usual stopping point here where threads get shut down due to cat fights between members. You can either allow members to repeatedly abuse the "don't be an asshole" rule or you can step up to say the insults are out of line and unnecessary and as a result of enough people speaking up hopefully the thread can continue forward. I certainly have noticed that one "side" of these threads has never had a problem with calling anyone on the "other side" for what the see as incivility. If necessary, Freako, I can supply context to that statement.

There's my explanation of what I was attempting, now can we get back to the subject of the thread?

Good. I want civil discussions between people behaving as adults as well. However I have no hope, that ANYTHING I say or do will help. Look at how EW mocked the "believers", and pushed SM's boundries beyond the limit, even after being warned several times. I am not comparing Buddha and Ethan, but I fear that my contribution makes no difference in either case. People are people, and they will forever stay that way. Sad but true. We cannot change other people, only ourselves.

Still, I'd be very happy to see everyone let everybody else have their conviction in peace and harmony.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Still, I'd be very happy to see everyone let everybody else have their conviction in peace and harmony.

If only they'd return the favor.

Try discussing remedial tweaks and the Beltists won't stand for it!

ericarjes
ericarjes's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jun 3 2010 - 9:32pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????

Buddha,

I am not about to debate whether "David L." is a troll. I think 140 posts attacking the acoustic art make that plain enough. I take it he's a friend of yours, and that is why you are defending his behavior. In which case, it would be a waste of time to make you forget your clear lack of objectivity toward him. That aside, I have written an on-topic reply to you, discussing the acoustic art. Instead of you responding to it, David L. did. Why have you re-entered the thread to defend his obvious trolling, rather than stay on topic of the thread? Are you not interested in talking about audio? It appears you'd rather attack people instead, which I find dismaying. But if that's the case, let me know, I'll stay out of your way.


Quote:
As a reader of Stereophile, are you not intrigued why the discussion went from measuring these babies to "Since we don't have a purpose built room, there will be no measurements?"

No. I could not care less about that detail. I own the system, remember? I would certainly not be "waiting for measurements" for a year and a half, for someone to tell me whether something works or not, before I am free to try it for myself. That sounds more like someone who's interested in "data", than someone who's interested in improving the sound of their music. More to the point, why are you obsessing about it? You're on a fault-finding mission? Certainly, some here seem to be wrt the acoustic art. I don't believe that any willful skeptic will be swayed by "measurements" anyway. I certainly haven't seen you or your friend David declare your fondness and acceptance for any of the Tchang measurements that were posted. So I really don't think its about "measurements" for you guys.


Quote:
Ever hear that reason as a reason not to measure other gear in a reviewer's natural habitat?

Are you familiar with a "dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter"? You should, it's the logical fallacy you just used on me. I believe the reason was already given by Mr. Atkinson to your friend David L., in the last thread on this that got shut down:

" Because the engineer I consulted wanted to use a completely bare room that could be totally characterized before attempting to measure the effect (if any) of Ted's bowls. That way the variables would be restricted to just what we were trying to measure. Experimental design when the something being measured is very small is not as trivially easy as you appear to believe."

Given the remarkable hostility against the Art system here, I can fully understand the decision. Can you please point me to the message where you detailed your observations of the acoustic art you said you demo'ed? I'm sure it would help me put your comments in perspective.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
Breaking News!! Discussion of How the Franck Tchang Acoustic Resonators . . . (Bowls) Work,


Thanks!

A fun read.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 47 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
"The discussion (and Ted's own product description!) was usurped and turned for the umpteenth time to the realm of Beltism...as certain people ceaselessly do."

Yet more misinformation, Buddha. Anything to attempt to discredit me, eh ?

Elk originally asked "If the ART devices are NOT 'affecting the room acoustics', then what ARE they doing ?

I therefore re-introduced John A's contribution:-


Quote:
"could it be that they are diffracting/reflecting that RF bath away from the listener, thus improving his state of mind and his receptivity to the music?"

Which, actually takes the discussion then into the realms of "something affecting the listener".


Quote:
"Try discussing remedial tweaks and the Beltists won't stand for it!"

Again, completely uncalled for !!

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

I certainly haven't seen you or your friend David declare your fondness and acceptance for any of the Tchang measurements that were posted.

Then you should try reading the forums.

It seems that other than Geoff, I have been the only supporter of Tchang's attempts at measurement.

Are you upset at JA for discounting Tchang's measurements? (Seriously, you should read that thread. You seem to have things backwards.)

I also support the idea of the ART System being a resonant device, as described by Ted - which infuriates our resident magical thinkers who woun't "allow" them to work this way.

I don't know David L. He is obviously worked up over what he feels is obfuscation.

It is somewhat amazing to me that audiophiles would be curious enough to try the ART System, then lose all curiosity about the concept of operation thereafter. I thought you said you guys were open minded explorers? It didn't make you want to think further about it? What else you might add or subtract?

Heck, measuring may even present and opportunity to improve them further!

Other than my disdain for sales BS from Geoff and May, and Clark's irrelevant rants, I do wish the topic would remain with the ART Bowls.

For instance...have you noticed a difference in the degree of effect between different recordings?

Other than "transformative," how would you describe the effects you hear?

Differences between recordings recorded in 'live' environments vs. 'all studio?'

Differences in treble regions where the bowls' resonant frequencies might be most noticable?

Any trials of removing one or more bowls and what you notice?

Alterations in the sweet spot? Is the effect 'room-wide,' or does it change with your position?

Cheers.

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????

For all the cry babies on here, I've never read so much BS from so few people. Eric, you come on here praising Ted's magic bowls but won't even consider doing a DBT because? Oh yeah I forgot, you know what you heard so it doesn't matter to the rest of us. WOW!!!!!!!! That's enough for me to go rushing out and spend $3000 yes sir I'd be careful asking for people to be banned, last I heard THAT is also a banning offense. Hey, if you don't like reading what I post about Ted's bowls then feel free NOT to read it, Simple enough for you?Lets see 17 posts from you and ALL are about Ted's bowls. I guess that makes you and ted close friends?

SAS, Geoff and Jan........what can I say other than you all 3 deserve each other

"Traditional acoustic measurements like with any speaker, with and without the bowls present and a DBT. Anything else isn't needed. If you can't tell a difference with your eyes closed but still argue that the test isn't valid then you have other issues regarding your own integrity and intelligence."

Soooooo what's the problem, can't anyone here simply pick out when the little bowls are or aren't in the same room each time without looking? Seems simple enough. Simple enough until you start ranting about DBT not being reliable and blah blah blah......that's just such a sad excuse and just proves plenty about your integrity and intelligence.

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

It has already been demonstrated that you can not even read a schematic/wiring diagram, first semester science.

What? sorry but show me where that statement is anywhere on this website? Perhaps you are referring to when I asked how a power cord could effect the sound on an amps outputs? Still haven't got an explanation from you on that one. Any tests, graphs, results you would care to share perhaps on a new thread? If this isn't what you are referring to then please be more specific if that's possible for you.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
For instance...have you noticed a difference in the degree of effect between different recordings?

Other than "transformative," how would you describe the effects you hear?

Differences between recordings recorded in 'live' environments vs. 'all studio?'

Differences in treble regions where the bowls' resonant frequencies might be most noticable?

Any trials of removing one or more bowls and what you notice?

Alterations in the sweet spot? Is the effect 'room-wide,' or does it change with your position?


Great questions.

Perhaps Eric and others will let us know their thoughts.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

It has already been demonstrated that you can not even read a schematic/wiring diagram, first semester science.

What if Ted can't read a schemantic?

Does that mean something in the context of these bowls?

If Ted can't demonstrate schematic reading skills to your satisfaction, does that mean the bowls don't work?

Maybe you can put up a schematic/wiring diagram for Ted and David L to discuss to settle the score.

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:

It has already been demonstrated that you can not even read a schematic/wiring diagram, first semester science.

What if Ted can't read a schemantic?

Does that mean something in the context of these bowls?

If Ted can't demonstrate schematic reading skills to your satisfaction, does that mean the bowls don't work?

Maybe you can put up a schematic/wiring diagram for Ted and David L to discuss to settle the score.

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:

It has already been demonstrated that you can not even read a schematic/wiring diagram, first semester science.

What? sorry but show me where that statement is anywhere on this website? Perhaps you are referring to when I asked how a power cord could effect the sound on an amps outputs? Still haven't got an explanation from you on that one. Any tests, graphs, results you would care to share perhaps on a new thread? If this isn't what you are referring to then please be more specific if that's possible for you.

Sidestepping and manipulating what you stated, again. This is actually what you stated my friend.


Quote:
in my opinion based upon science and common sense, power cords do nothing other than carry ac current to your power transformer.

Quite an inclusive statement. Quite different from what you stated in your last post that I quoted, attempting to alter and expand what you actually stated. Sorry but being able to read a schematic or wiring diagram would demonstrate that an audio signal does flow through about 99.9% of three wire AC power cords. Simple fact. Not just AC as you claim "based upon science". I would suggest taking a first semester class in electronics. By the way the ground wire carries both left and right audio signals so mixing takes placea long with any 60hz pickup. Each setup will be different depending upon resistance, inductance, even capacitance, so each home setup will change the results. Another concern for subjective dbt testing.

Producing false "science" confuses the public and leaves a bad mark in the public's eye. But don't feel too bad as Jneutron had to explain this simple fact to several "scientific" engineers as well on AVS forum.

As far as subjective dbt accuracy, many factors and variables affect the quality of the results. Factors such as excessive bass, echoes, habituation to stimuli, cochlea fatigue, memory problems resulting from the time interval between initially hearing the reference until the ABs during testing were completed, manipulation etc. All slew towards no sonic difference. I also see you could not produce an AB test we could analyze.

I support JA's methods far more.

Cheers.

PS. Too all, be careful of this link DavidL posts on page 13, as when downloading page contents my browser immediately started "not responding". Luckily my protection programs fixed the problems.

TrojanAgent/gen-Image DOCFake

and

Trojan.Dropper/win-NV

were found in files and Memory processes. This is a possible safety precaution to all on the next page link.

"http:\\seanolive.blogspot.com/"

PSS. I checked the webpage, 6-15-10, and all appears to be ok.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

Quote:
Breaking News!! Discussion of How the Franck Tchang Acoustic Resonators . . . (Bowls) Work,


Thanks!

A fun read.

I'm as pleased as punch that you find it a fun read, but gee, whiz, is that all you have to say? You know, it's OK for facilitators to say something other than mumbling a few words.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
I'm as pleased as punch that you find it a fun read, but gee, whiz, is that all you have to say? You know, it's OK for facilitators to say something other than mumbling a few words.


There's a lot in there! Anything specific?

I had not truly appreciated how tiny these things are until I saw the pictures. The theory of operation is fascinating (resonating exclusively in the overtone range).

It's a great read.

ericarjes
ericarjes's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jun 3 2010 - 9:32pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Then you should try reading the forums.

I've been trying to catch up with older posts so I know what you guys are talking about, but there's a lot of ground to cover in a limited time. It would help if you told me where your comments on the measurements are, and on your experiences with the acoustic art.


Quote:
It seems that other than Geoff, I have been the only supporter of Tchang's attempts at measurement.

I was speaking about the measurements themselves, not the attempt to measure. Did you post criticisms of those was well, or were you accepting of the measurements? I know that JA had reservations due to the LF component. There are some new measurements out apparently, but I can't seem to get the link to work. I think we're on the same page in that we both recognize the resonators as "resonators".


Quote:
I don't know David L. He is obviously worked up over what he feels is obfuscation.

Or competition. That's more what it looks like, from the posts I have read. I'm sorry, but I wasn't born yesterday. I'm not about to believe that someone is going to get that "worked up" over an acoustic resonator system, that he starts attacking it as soon as he registers on this forum, and then does that exclusively over a 7 month period and 144 posts, without an ulterior motive. That is the very definition of ulterior motive. If I decided I hated Shakti stones, and registered on any other forum and started screaming "where's the measurements!" and all I did was attack the company for 7 months straight, I'd have been booted out on my arse 7 months ago. There's a difference between "trolling" and "contributing" to an audio discussion community. Anyone familiar with what a forum troll is can recognize him as one. Do not think that there is no such thing as unethical individuals who work for or own audio companies, bearing an agenda against their competitors. And who go from forum to forum attacking their competitors under assumed names, in order to hurt them in the marketplace. There are, as I've come across a few. Although I must say, I have never seen one survive this long on a moderated forum.


Quote:
It is somewhat amazing to me that audiophiles would be curious enough to try the ART System, then lose all curiosity about the concept of operation thereafter. I thought you said you guys were open minded explorers? It didn't make you want to think further about it? What else you might add or subtract? Heck, measuring may even present and opportunity to improve them further!

You seem to be confusing audio consumers with audio engineers. It is the role of the engineer to understand how his products work and make improvements to them. The only role an audio consumer need play is to derive enjoyment out of them. It isn't black or white. My point isn't to not be curious about how audio products work. It's that you don't need to know how they work to know whether they do work, or to appreciate them working.


Quote:
For instance...have you noticed a difference in the degree of effect between different recordings?
Differences between recordings recorded in 'live' environments vs. 'all studio?'

Yes, but those differences have nothing to do with the acoustic arts. There are natural differences between all recordings and pressings.

Other than "transformative," how would you describe the effects you hear?

I suggested to Elk I might post a review when time permits. So I think it would be better to do so there, than in dribs and drabs. Please don't let that stop you from describing the effects you heard in the demo you attended. Or you could point me to the appropriate post where you talked about it.

Differences in treble regions where the bowls' resonant frequencies might be most noticable?

No, the effect on the sound carries across the frequency range, it is not oriented toward the treble in any way. In fact, it can be heard on voices alone, which hovers around the midrange. Of course, I'm speaking for my system, I can not speak for other products in the range I've not tried and know nothing about.

Alterations in the sweet spot? Is the effect 'room-wide,' or does it change with your position?
Any trials of removing one or more bowls and what you notice?

It depends on which resonator is removed, as their effect is not equal. The influence is room-wide and more, but the problem of the sweet spot is one of the speakers and surrounding objects, so that I don't believe that is altered. They're good questions though, and perhaps I can cover these points as well in a review, when I get around to that.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

Quote:
I'm as pleased as punch that you find it a fun read, but gee, whiz, is that all you have to say? You know, it's OK for facilitators to say something other than mumbling a few words.


There's a lot in there! Anything specific?

I had not truly appreciated how tiny these things are until I saw the pictures.

Well, that's kind of the whole point, that these tiny things can have any effect on the sound, much less such a dramatic effect on the bass frequencies. Is the reason for the controversy starting to sink in a little bit?

By the way, there's an excellent photo illustrating the scale of these little guys on the following page (scroll about half way down the page to the photo with two resonators and a wood match).

Pop Quiz: anyone know how many Tchang bowls would fit in one ART bowl? Ans. at 11.

Page Showing Closeup of 2 Tchang Resonators

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quite an inclusive statement. Quite different from what you stated in your last post that I quoted, attempting to alter and expand what you actually stated. Sorry but being able to read a schematic or wiring diagram would demonstrate that an audio signal does flow through about 99.9% of three wire AC power cords. Simple fact. Not just AC as you claim "based upon science". I would suggest taking a first semester class in electronics. By the way the ground wire carries both left and right audio signals so mixing takes placea long with any 60hz pickup. Each setup will be different depending upon resistance, inductance, even capacitance, so each home setup will change the results. Another concern for subjective dbt testing.

Producing false "science" confuses the public and leaves a bad mark in the public's eye. But don't feel too bad as Jneutron had to explain this simple fact to several "scientific" engineers as well on AVS forum.

As far as subjective dbt accuracy, many factors and variables affect the quality of the results. Factors such as excessive bass, echoes, habituation to stimuli, cochlea fatigue, memory problems resulting from the time interval between initially hearing the reference until the ABs during testing were completed, manipulation etc. All slew towards no sonic difference. I also see you could not produce an AB test we could analyze.

I support JA's methods far more.

Cheers.

As I see it, the audio ground signal paths between components is very short compared to the path from chassis ground, through the power cord, to earth ground sooooooo, since current travels through the path of least resistance, the audio signal does NOT travel through a power cord ground at all. Wouldn't the ground resistance through the power cord be higher the further away the earth ground is?

http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/generic%20seminar.pdf

In the above link, they don't seem very impressed with any sort of fancy audio cables and describe the problems associated with ground loops.

Nice way to avoid using DBT at all with your "excuses".Yeah removing and replacing the little bowls would take 'forever" wouldn't it?

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/

Should be plenty of DBT results for you to browse through on here. Try looking at older posts on there also.

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:


Quote:
I don't know David L. He is obviously worked up over what he feels is obfuscation.

Or competition. That's more what it looks like, from the posts I have read. I'm sorry, but I wasn't born yesterday. I'm not about to believe that someone is going to get that "worked up" over an acoustic resonator system, that he starts attacking it as soon as he registers on this forum, and then does that exclusively over a 7 month period and 144 posts, without an ulterior motive. That is the very definition of ulterior motive. If I decided I hated Shakti stones, and registered on any other forum and started screaming "where's the measurements!" and all I did was attack the company for 7 months straight, I'd have been booted out on my arse 7 months ago. There's a difference between "trolling" and "contributing" to an audio discussion community. Anyone familiar with what a forum troll is can recognize him as one. Do not think that there is no such thing as unethical individuals who work for or own audio companies, bearing an agenda against their competitors. And who go from forum to forum attacking their competitors under assumed names, in order to hurt them in the marketplace. There are, as I've come across a few. Although I must say, I have never seen one survive this long on a moderated forum.

If you are accusing me of something then just come out and say it already and stop being such a shill for Ted okay? You come on here and the FIRST thing you do is PRAISE his magic bowls then get your panties in a wad when anyone asks for objective proof. You can look up my 140 posts but you also can't find where Ted had the measurements? You're not looking very hard then. He prob took them down after they were revealed to be BOGUS. So tell us what YOUR agenda is for being on here defending his products so vehemently?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

For instance...have you noticed a difference in the degree of effect between different recordings?
Differences between recordings recorded in 'live' environments vs. 'all studio?'

Yes, but those differences have nothing to do with the acoustic arts. There are natural differences between all recordings and pressings.

Not to ruin a future review, but I was more curious as to whether certain types of recordings exhibited differential benefit, if that makes sense.

As to Tchang's measurements, I have only pointed out that I appreciate they were done and have not commented on any perceived deficiencies. I leave that sort of thing to the 'experts,' like JA, or Ethan.

What surprised me most about JA's decision not to measure is that I would think any room could be 'measured' before and after placement of the ART Bowls, as was done for Tchang bowls.

The audiophile market is a drop in the bucket compared to what could be done for theaters, clubs, concert halls, etc.

Measuring would seem a natural consequence!

Which points up to another weird thing about audio - we are afloat in a sea of people who operate at subatomic and near magical levels of claims (not referencing ART here,) yet they utterly fail to transition their Nobel or mulitple-Nobel worthy claims outside the realm of sales to audiophiles.

What a coincidence!

It is a wild hobby.

returnstackerror
returnstackerror's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 5 days ago
Joined: May 17 2007 - 8:32pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????

I read the sixmoons review and the solution is simple.

Some of you NY based guys hook up with Stephen Mejias.

Others (I am game) along with the NY based guys all contribute enough money to buy ONE of these devices. Stephen can be the holder of the money.

Then Stephen and crew go to a restaurant and use the device to reduce the ambient noise as per the review (because Frank says it will ALWAYS works... hence him recommending you always carry a spare)

If there is a general agreement that it changed the background noise then we will know.

All very easy and cheap.

as per the review " This concluded Franck's tuning of our dwelling but not our adventures of meeting the wizard of resonance tuning. When we had dinner together after wrapping up the flat with a bow, he pulled out a secret emergency resonator from his pocket and put it right in the middle of our restaurant table. He asked us to listen carefully for what was going to happen. The Indonesian restaurant was very busy on this Saturday night. Many families and friends were enjoying the sumptuous delights of the rijsttafel, huge collections of various rice, vegetable, meat and side dishes. All these happy eaters made quite the din. After a few minutes however, the three of us were as though enveloped in our own private bubble. Our own voices had gotten somewhat damped and lacking in spatial information but sounds from outside the bubble were subdued and much farther away. Putting the silver resonator upside down on the tablecloth to stop it working brought all the background noise back again. We repeated this uncovering and covering several times, each time with the same results. Franck insisted we carry a resonator on us every time we go to a concert or restaurant. By turning the resonator and so changing The Window as Franck had already demonstrated in the workshop, one can focus on the stage at a concert or, in a restaurant, choose a victim to eavesdrop on

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????

Returnstackerror!

Brilliant!

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
As I see it, the audio ground signal paths between components is very short compared to the path from chassis ground, through the power cord, to earth ground sooooooo, since current travels through the path of least resistance, the audio signal does NOT travel through a power cord ground at all. Wouldn't the ground resistance through the power cord be higher the further away the earth ground is?

I would suggest learning about Kirchoff voltage and current laws to help you understand as you are incorrect. See my previous posts for further explanation. Kirchoff voltage and current laws are absolutely necessary to understanding basic schematics and before designing simple circuits.
Not only are resistances involved but also inductances and magnetic fields which affect currents at different frequencies.


Quote:

http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/generic%20seminar.pdf


Do you wish to quote what part that you think backs up your above claim?

There is always current flow via musical signal between components via ICs and via AC power ground.


Quote:
In the above link, they don't seem very impressed with any sort of fancy audio cables and describe the problems associated with ground loops.


That is not the subject, the accuracy of your comments are.


Quote:
Nice way to avoid using DBT at all with your "excuses".Yeah removing and replacing the little bowls would take 'forever" wouldn't it?

We are not talking bowls, we are discussing your basic understanding of science/engineering. The "excuses" are facts that influence subjective dbt testing and will skew the test to "no sonic difference" if not accounted for, or if one wishes to manipulate the conclusion. Unfortunately, your knowledge concerning subjective audio dbt testing is extremely limited either because the information was/is not presented or your lack of understanding.


Quote:
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/

Should be plenty of DBT results for you to browse through on here. Try looking at older posts on there also.

Too all, be careful of this link as when downloading my browser immediately "not responding". Luckily my protection programs fixed the problems.

TrojanAgent/gen-Image DOCFake

and

Trojan.Dropper/win-NV

were found in files and Memory processes. This is a possible safety precaution to all.

I hate to sound rude; you might be good at pre-programmed responses, but when posting basic science/engineering, your knowledge is extremely inaccurate. This causes confusion and negative reactions when it comes to real science.

I also suggest JA's protocol when testing, extended listening etc.

Cheers.

PS. I checked the link early this morning, 6-15-10, and the webpage appears to be ok. However I would be careful.

PSS. Checked out this test.
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2010/02/evaluating-sound-quality-of-ipod-music.html

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2010/04/evaluating-sound-quality-of-ipod-music.html

Not one mention of any variables I mentioned in my previous posts. So those variables are not accounted for during those tests, which can skew findings. Luckily the findings were positive, however, he cannot prove that blind listening was any better since he accounted for no varibles. Also interesting that Dr. Olive immediately blames sighted listening tests although he never discusses his lack of concern over variables.

Psss. 2010 Winter Symposium Technical Papers - Review

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

Quote:
"The discussion (and Ted's own product description!) was usurped and turned for the umpteenth time to the realm of Beltism...as certain people ceaselessly do."

Yet more misinformation, Buddha. Anything to attempt to discredit me, eh ?

Elk originally asked "If the ART devices are NOT 'affecting the room acoustics', then what ARE they doing ?

I therefore re-introduced John A's contribution:-


Quote:
"could it be that they are diffracting/reflecting that RF bath away from the listener, thus improving his state of mind and his receptivity to the music?"

Which, actually takes the discussion then into the realms of "something affecting the listener".


Quote:
"Try discussing remedial tweaks and the Beltists won't stand for it!"

Again, completely uncalled for !!

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

Not that I wanna dig deep into this, not that it's my place to do it, but if you're able to sell ehh... somewhat mysterious tweaks, and a reasonable portion of the customers are happy, then what's the trouble for all the doubters? Don't like those tweaks? Then stay away.

I for one tend to stick with tweaks my poor old brain understands, in a context that provides a meaning for me. I am - to be honest - very much in doubt whether Peter and May's tweaks, Geoff's cell phone tweak, or any other controversial tweak actually DO work, but since I've never ever purchased any of them (yet), I wouldn't be able to say: "They are all scams". I just wish everybody had the same attitude.

David_L
David_L's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 28 2009 - 8:23am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:
As I see it, the audio ground signal paths between components is very short compared to the path from chassis ground, through the power cord, to earth ground sooooooo, since current travels through the path of least resistance, the audio signal does NOT travel through a power cord ground at all. Wouldn't the ground resistance through the power cord be higher the further away the earth ground is?

I would suggest learning about Kirchoff voltage and current laws to help you understand as you are incorrect. See my previous posts for further explanation. Kirchoff voltage and current laws are absolutely necessary to understanding basic schematics and before designing simple circuits.
Not only are resistances involved but also inductances and magnetic fields which affect currents at different frequencies.


Quote:

http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/generic%20seminar.pdf


Do you wish to quote what part that you think backs up your above claim?

There is always current flow via musical signal between components via ICs and via AC power ground.


Quote:
In the above link, they don't seem very impressed with any sort of fancy audio cables and describe the problems associated with ground loops.


That is not the subject, the accuracy of your comments are.


Quote:
Nice way to avoid using DBT at all with your "excuses".Yeah removing and replacing the little bowls would take 'forever" wouldn't it?

We are not talking bowls, we are discussing your basic understanding of science/engineering. The "excuses" are facts that influence subjective dbt testing and will skew the test to "no sonic difference" if not accounted for, or if one wishes to manipulate the conclusion. Unfortunately, your knowledge concerning subjective audio dbt testing is extremely limited either because the information was/is not presented or your lack of understanding.


Quote:
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/

Should be plenty of DBT results for you to browse through on here. Try looking at older posts on there also.

Too all, be careful of this link as when downloading my browser immediately "not responding". Luckily my protection programs fixed the problems.

TrojanAgent/gen-Image DOCFake

and

Trojan.Dropper/win-NV

were found in files and Memory processes. This is a possible safety precaution to all.

I hate to sound rude; you might be good at pre-programmed responses, but when posting basic science/engineering, your knowledge is extremely inaccurate. This causes confusion and negative reactions when it comes to real science.

I also suggest JA's protocol when testing, extended listening etc.

Cheers.

PS. I checked the link early this morning, 6-15-10, and the webpage appears to be ok. However I would be careful.

Care to post some measurements via an oscilloscope showing audio signal flow through a power cord? I'm betting you can't. Did you bother to read the whole article I linked to? They discussed capacitance, resistance and inductance. So you can't show a difference on an amps outputs by simply changing the power cord to a "better" one? No references, no measurements, nothing? At least I post links, all you do is post conjecture.

Lets see you prove the accuracy of YOUR statements then

No YOU are not talking about bowls, but I was please try to stay on topic.If you wish to 'try" to prove my statements wrong then start a new thread. Your lack of DBT understanding is your "excuse" for not even doing one

You can't even seem to operate your computer for an innocent link without you shouting TROJAN!!!
May I suggest you take some computer courses at your local college?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Which points up to another weird thing about audio - we are afloat in a sea of people who operate at subatomic and near magical levels of claims (not referencing ART here) yet they utterly fail to transition their Nobel or mulitple-Nobel worthy claims outside the realm of sales to audiophiles.

Uh, oh, Strawman Argument rears ugly head. (I know, you found no evidence contradicting your argument, blah, blah, blah )

You seem to be suggesting tweak manufacturers should be working for cancer research or weapon system development. How bizzare is that?.....

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Care to post some measurements via an oscilloscope showing audio signal flow through a power cord?

I don't need to waste my time using a scope unless you believe Kirchoff's current laws are suddenly suspended, or "conjecture". Interesting you believe in science until science disproves you. Signal grounds and AC power ground are connected together in 99.9% of components, so signal current flows through the power cord, proving you are 100% incorrect. So again you are wasting everyone's time by posting false information.


Quote:
I'm betting you can't. Did you bother to read the whole article I linked to? They discussed capacitance, resistance and inductance. So you can't show a difference on an amps outputs by simply changing the power cord to a "better" one?

What about peak currents that correlate to signal level, basic electronics. As usual you embarrass yourself once again. The subject was your gross inaccuracies about science, which I have disprove many times over. DBT shortly to follow.


Quote:
No references, no measurements, nothing? At least I post links, all you do is post conjecture.


Posting links proves nothing as I already demonstrated. And unfortunately for you the links you posted prove my point. I suggest that you take a basic course in electronics/engineering and learn about Kirchoff's voltage and current laws, which are not conjecture.


Quote:

If you wish to 'try" to prove my statements wrong then start a new thread. Your lack of DBT understanding is your "excuse" for not even doing one

Checking your links only substantiates that Dr. Olive did not covered any variables that I mentioned earlier. Of course this skews the subjects responses, thus corrupting the input data used in the dbt test. Thanks for the links arguing against yourself DavidL.


Quote:
You can't even seem to operate your computer for an innocent link without you shouting TROJAN!!!
May I suggest you take some computer courses at your local college?

Sorry but your last statement betrays your true motives. Clicking on your link has nothing to do with its operation, and the fact that you had to use this tatic demonstrates your dishonest demeanor to all. By the way, last night I had a computer guru (windows certified) verify my findings and am sending information off to the Federal Investigator I have been sending info to for the past two years.

By the way it is interesting that you claim science to attack others but when caught with your pants down, you attack science.

Cheers.

Ps. Dr. Olive works for a certain audio manufacturing group.


Quote:
Presenter Bio: Dr. Sean Olive, Harman International
Sean is Director of Acoustic Research for Harman International, a major manufacturer of audio products for consumer, professional and automotive spaces.

Instead of lynch mobbing a manufacturer, let's wait for some data to come in with a proper understanding of the pros and cons of that science.

smejias
smejias's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: Aug 25 2005 - 10:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Too all, be careful of this link as when downloading my browser immediately "not responding".


I haven't experienced any problems accessing Sean Olive's blog, and I don't think there's any reason to be concerned.


Quote:
Psss.


"PS" stands for "postscript." "PPS" stands for "post-postscript." "PSSS" would stand for "post-script-script-script," which doesn't make any sense, SAS, FYI. Unless you're trying to tell us a secret or something. Psss: Hey kid, you wanna letter "S"?

smejias
smejias's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: Aug 25 2005 - 10:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Too all, be careful of this link as when downloading my browser immediately "not responding". Luckily my protection programs fixed the problems.


I haven't experienced any problems accessing Sean Olive's blog, and I don't think there is any reason to be concerned.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
You can look up my 140 posts but you also can't find where Ted had the measurements? You're not looking very hard then. He prob took them down after they were revealed to be BOGUS.

Is there an audio equivalent to the Tea Party? Are you their ... ummmm ... "leader"?

What would you prefer, he leave the inaccurate measurements up? Then you'd complain about that. You complain just because Ted breathes. 140+ times on this forum alone you've complained simply because Ted breathes.

Oh, I know, you'd prefer he just "measure the FUCKING BOWLS!". Well, you have your answer from Ted and JA on that matter. They'll get back to you.

So, there's really no need for you to be here any longer. Ta-ta.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
Thanks for the info on the Tchang resonators, btw. Great contribution, which I will read with some interest. I know about the air, but I don't know how it passes through a fridge door. I've not done experiments in that area though, so I'll have to read more about that. While there are considerable differences between the two systems, I believe the basic principles they are founded on still apply.

Eric, how about discussing what you see as differences and similarities between the Tchang system and what you own?

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Good. I want civil discussions between people behaving as adults as well.

Good, then here's your chance. Have you read the articles geoff linked to? What do you think?

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/francktchang/resonators.html

RGibran
RGibran's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: Oct 11 2005 - 5:50pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
I am - to be honest - very much in doubt whether Peter and May's tweaks, Geoff's cell phone tweak, or any other controversial tweak actually DO work, but since I've never ever purchased any of them (yet), I wouldn't be able to say: "They are all scams". I just wish everybody had the same attitude.

What the fuck is wrong with people???????????? Let me see if I have this right.

You

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????

Code:If there is a general agreement that it changed the background noise then we will know.

Did you bother to read the articles?


Quote:
After four demonstrations to four groups of HVT readers, we confirmed that of 30-some participants, not one left with the impression that he or she had been duped or was the victim of a mass hypnosis. Even the most skeptical listener was convinced that what he heard and saw was real and repeatable. http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/francktchang/resonators_3.html

Tell me when you stopped thinking gravity was in effect.


Quote:
Race To The Bottooommm
2009 Darwin Award Nominee
Confirmed True by Darwin

(5 September 2009, Oregon) Jake reached the summit of Saddle Mountain, and then and there he informed his friends that he planned to make a controlled slide down the cliff face. He would meet up with them in the parking lot or on the trail below.
Some folks are satisfied with the risks and rewards of dune sliding, and the chance of a 150-foot broken-limb tumble. Not Jake. The 18-year-old decided to 'git-r-dun' down a thousand-foot cliff, instead. He slid pell-mell down the escarpment--and what was intended to be a controlled rockslide ended abruptly 1000 feet below the summit, when his body came to rest in a steep ravine.

Friends were shocked. "We are shocked," they said, "because he is always doing stuff like this and coming out smiling."

http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2009-11.html
/>

Shall we just change your name to "Jake"? What part of "30 out of 30" escapes you?

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????

C'mon, Stephen, that's unnecessary and out of line.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
This behavior speaks more of an agenda against the product or the company, than it does of a doubting Thomas.

Eric, I believe you're catching on to D'Ethan.


Quote:
At the same CES, Franck had a maker of traditional room treatments walk into the Acoustic System exhibit, badge - um, flipped to disguise identity and accost the exhibitors of snake oil peddling. Smart man. While he may not have sat down to calmly evaluate things and ask for a demonstration, he did understand that if this stuff worked -- and there was suggestive evidence in a few rooms -- competition had just heated up.
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/francktchang/resonators_6.html

Editor
Editor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 8:56am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2009-11.html

Good grief, that's an addictive website.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:
Which points up to another weird thing about audio - we are afloat in a sea of people who operate at subatomic and near magical levels of claims (not referencing ART here) yet they utterly fail to transition their Nobel or mulitple-Nobel worthy claims outside the realm of sales to audiophiles.

Uh, oh, Strawman Argument rears ugly head. (I know, you found no evidence contradicting your argument, blah, blah, blah )

You seem to be suggesting tweak manufacturers should be working for cancer research or weapon system development. How bizzare is that?.....

Uh, no.

I'm 'suggesting' that they are actually just full of crap.

A more accurate 'suggestion' would be they work at a carnival.

Since you seem to be our picture savant...

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Which points up to another weird thing about audio - we are afloat in a sea of people who operate at subatomic and near magical levels of claims (not referencing ART here) yet they utterly fail to transition their Nobel or mulitple-Nobel worthy claims outside the realm of sales to audiophiles.

Uh, oh, Strawman Argument rears ugly head. (I know, you found no evidence contradicting your argument, blah, blah, blah )

You seem to be suggesting tweak manufacturers should be working for cancer research or weapon system development. How bizzare is that?.....

Uh, no.

I'm 'suggesting' that they are actually just full of crap.

A more accurate 'suggestion' would be they work at a carnival.

Since you seem to be our picture savant...

So that's what a wine hangover looks like. That would certainly explain your hostility. I grieve for your liver.

Have you given any consideration to a check-up from the neck up?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Have you given any consideration to a check-up from the neck up?

No, thanks to you. If I start believing your pitch, then I know it's time.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Good grief, that's an addictive website.

It provides us with that little sense of superiority we all crave, until one day we look and find our own name listed.

http://darwinawardsdvd.com/

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:

Good. I want civil discussions between people behaving as adults as well.

Good, then here's your chance. Have you read the articles geoff linked to? What do you think?

Sorry, haven't read any of them...

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:

Quote:
I am - to be honest - very much in doubt whether Peter and May's tweaks, Geoff's cell phone tweak, or any other controversial tweak actually DO work, but since I've never ever purchased any of them (yet), I wouldn't be able to say: "They are all scams". I just wish everybody had the same attitude.

What the fuck is wrong with people???????????? Let me see if I have this right.

You

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????

Did you really have to repost the whole damn thing?

Geeeeez!

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:
Sorry, haven't read any of them...

Any plans to? You know, so we all have something in common to discuss?

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or Seance????


Quote:
Did you really have to repost the whole damn thing?

Geeeeez!

Apparently. Anything wrong with that, or do you get a rash every time a Texan posts something?

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: Acoustic Art Bowls: Science or ??????


Quote:

Quote:
Sorry, haven't read any of them...

Any plans to? You know, so we all have something in common to discuss?

No, I don't plan to read them.

Pages

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading