You are here

Log in or register to post comments
ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I have to say that some of what you characterize as "personal attacks" is people responding in kind.


No John, it never transpires in that order. I'm always nice and I stick to the science. Others then insult me, and sometimes after I've had enough I insult them back. But more often I point out the weakness of their "arguments" which consist of Ethan sucks at the cello and ROTFLMAO and so forth. I understand it's a lot of effort to read entire threads to see who started it, but if you bothered to do that you'd see it's never me. Never.


Quote:
Not really, as that tends to be self-defeating.


So you're fine with off-topic insults and personal attacks in a forum that aims to discuss high-end audio? Really?


Quote:
There is a subset of Internet bullies who employ the "put it to a DBT" cry much as the sheep bleated "4 legs good, 2 legs bad" in "Animal Farm, ie, to drown out discussion.


I understand that you and others prefer for this stuff to be unknowable. Otherwise, fully half of all hi-fi products would be exposed for the BS they are. I've read all the arguments against DBT for audio, and I remain unconvinced. DBT is the gold standard for all science, and audio is no exception. The real problem is, as Buddha points out again and again, that golden ears turn to tarnished brass as soon as the name plates are hidden.


Quote:
Good thing you're not the moderator then, Ethan. :-)


Good thing for who?

--Ethan

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Even Ethan would agree that 'cables matter,' his point of contention is 'how much do they matter?'


Yes, how much they matter, and where they matter. As in lame toob gear with an output impedance higher than it should be. Even the believers acknowledge that cables make more difference in some systems than in others. Which is of course exactly what I've been saying. So Yes, sometimes a cable that sounds different is defective, but it's just as likely the gear driving the cables is "broken" or at least poorly designed.


Quote:
Maybe he would show the gumption to run some tests on a variety of cables?


I already offered to audition and test any cables you'd like to loan me. That was just a week or two ago, yes?


Quote:
DBT is a gross measurment, at best. I wouldn't say it qualifies as a "Hi FI'" endeavor - and I plan to get Ethan to agree!


Not likely. DBT does not have to be fast, or slow. As Arny Krueger always points out, his ABX software can be used over a period of months if you prefer. So that refutes all the arguments claiming DBT breaks the mood, or is too stressful, etc.

--Ethan

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Ethan just has a different opinion about the best way to help people most enjoy their hobby, and wants to share...and share in the same manner...over...and over...and over...and over...


You could replace "Ethan" with the name of any other prolific poster and it would be no less true.


Quote:
Ethan has it down pat - he insists on DBT's or measurements before he will alter an opinion


What does it take to get you to alter your opinion?


Quote:
when we ask him about DBT's, he says he won't do any because he already knows what the result will be.


Not so. It's the other camp that refuses to submit to a DBT. If they did, all of a sudden those incredibly obvious changes they hear would be shown to have no clothes.


Quote:
Ethan can't lose!


True, because I have science and logic on my side!

--Ethan

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Ethan just has a different opinion about the best way to help people most enjoy their hobby, and wants to share...and share in the same manner...over...and over...and over...and over...

Past history on this forum tells me this; when every question to or even remotely about member Z by member X, 1 or subset * is answered by member Y, 2 or subset #, you have your proof that member Z has "jumped the shark" and members Y, 2 and subset # are still watching the show.

It's all downhill from here.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I understand it's a lot of effort to read entire threads to see who started it, but if you bothered to do that you'd see it's never me. Never.

There you have it. Sliding downhill fast! Haven't we all seen this before?

Oh, yeah,

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Isn't this a thread about cables?

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 11 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

>>> "No John, it never transpires in that order. I'm always nice and I stick to the science. Others then insult me, and sometimes after I've had enough I insult them back. But more often I point out the weakness of their "arguments" which consist of Ethan sucks at the cello and ROTFLMAO and so forth. I understand it's a lot of effort to read entire threads to see who started it, but if you bothered to do that you'd see it's never me. Never." <<<

Methinks, Ethan, you are playing the innocent.
>>> "As you know, I never insult others first, only in defense." <<<

So, you never insult others first ?????????? Only in defense ?????????????

Your quote Ethan :-
>>> "Unless the heads of Furutech are idiots, which I doubt, all that's left is dishonesty." <<<

So, Ethan, the heads of Furutech insulted you first, did they ???????

Many of your responses are below. So much of the time, if something isn't 'snake oil', it is 'bullshit' or you imply 'fraud'

Ethan quote :-
>>>"Just measure what is real, and you'll have The Truth. Very simple! The only things that matter are frequency response, distortion, and noise." <<<

Ethan quote :-
>>> "Once you understand why other people fall for the stuff that you know is BS, then you'll understand why magic clocks and "premium" speaker and AC power wires are BS too." <<<

Ethan quote :-
>>> "Plastic cannot be magnetized or demagnetized, so a vinyl demagnetizer is BS snake oil by definition. But how in the hell can they state that CD's are affected ? - Exactly - same BS snake oil. They prey on consumer's lack of science education." <<<

Ethan quote :-
>>> "Otherwise, fully half of all hi-fi products would be exposed for the BS they are." <<<

Buddha says "Ethan has it down pat - he insists on DBT's or measurements before he will alter an opinion" to which you Ethan, ask Buddha "What does it take to get you to alter your opinion?"

How about personal experiences ? How about personal experiences over decades ? How about personal experience followed by personal experience followed by personal experience ??

Regards,
May Belt.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Look back at Art's AWSI and recall that sharpeners and levellers may have the same sensory experience, and that sharpeners may really just be exagerators, reporting something as being greater than it really is. So, we need both ends of the spectrum for equilibrium.

I notice you are quite happy to call Sharpeners "exagerators". You are not so quick to call Levellers "diminishers". I think both "exagerator" and "diminisher" are poor choices for descriptive labels and they did not appear in the article.

Your bias against those who sharpen what you dimish is showing, you are patting yourself on the back with one hand while shoving someone else down a flight of stairs with the other hand. I get the feeling every time you repeat this nonsense about Sharpeners as "exagerators" and everyone having the same experience except for those weak-kneed exagerators who need propping up etc., etc., etc. ... that you are hoping those who sharpen what you diminish will die a death of 1,000 cuts.

Do we "need" both "ends of the spectrum"? No more than we need hyper-partisan politicians. When the immovable partisan on one side confronts the immovabe partisan from the other side, nothing gets done - witness this forum. While there is always a need for those willing to stand up (or sit down as the case may be) and confront what they see as injustice the world actually works in the middle of the two. There's no real injustice involved in the audio industry. There is, however, the out of control partisan. No one is being harmed by cables or tweaks. There is no injustice created by tubes and single driver loudspeakers.

Only those with an unbending nature who simply cannot let go wish to make an issue of cables, tweaks and everything else that gets waylayed on this forum. Hyper-partisanship is truly only of value when there is a cause and there is no "cause" in audio. We are free to make our own decisions. We do not need protection supplied by those "who know better".

More from AD's article ...


Quote:
Woodies can be lovely, reasonable people, and many of the ones I've met over the years have impressed me with their deep, genuine love of good music. But the bad ones are really bad: pugnacious, tyrannical, and narrow-minded in a manner that goes well beyond the comparatively benign character flaws of even the most dilapidated fuzzy.


Quote:
I've seldom seen fuzzies show anywhere near the same interest in haranguing woodies as the other way around (footnote 2). In fact, whenever I see a debate between an average fuzzy and an especially rabid woody ...


Quote:
Footnote 2: This is similar to the differences I've noted between Stereophile readers of diametrically different political persuasions: The number of conservative readers who have written apoplectic notes canceling their subscriptions in response to things that "Dudley" has written has now swollen to seven; the number of liberal readers who have canceled subscriptions in reaction to overtly conservative remarks by other Stereophile writers stands at zero. Sigh...


Quote:
At no time is that more true than when the topic turns to double-blind testing. I have nothing against DBT, and I believe with all my heart that anyone who likes it or needs it or otherwise feels compelled to engage in it should simply do it
ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Hi May, it's nice to have a mostly normal conversation from someone on the other side.


Quote:
So, Ethan, the heads of Furutech insulted you first, did they ???????


I was talking about people who are present in the forum. But yeah, IMO everything Furutech sells that I've seen is BS. Replacement power plugs don't affect the audio at all. CDs don't need to be demagnetized. And all the rest. Now, if they were to show a positive effect on the audio using hard science, I'll change my opinion immediately. But you and I both know that will never happen because their entire product line is based on fooling people with placebos.


Quote:
So much of the time, if something isn't 'snake oil', it is 'bullshit' or you imply 'fraud'


I stand by that, and can explain in great detail why it's BS. But again, I was talking about the people in this forum who insult me personally because they can't refute what I say on the technical merits.


Quote:
Ethan quote :-
>>>"Just measure what is real, and you'll have The Truth. Very simple! The only things that matter are frequency response, distortion, and noise." <<<


Where is the insult in that?


Quote:
Ethan quote :-
>>> "Once you understand why other people fall for the stuff that you know is BS, then you'll understand why magic clocks and "premium" speaker and AC power wires are BS too." <<<


Or that?


Quote:
>>> "Otherwise, fully half of all hi-fi products would be exposed for the BS they are." <<<


But it's true! And again I can defend it with logic and reason and science. You may not like my answers. In fact, I'm sure you won't! But it's the truth anyway.


Quote:
How about personal experiences ? How about personal experiences over decades ? How about personal experience followed by personal experience followed by personal experience ??


I've been a professional audio engineer and musician for about 40 years, and I assure you all of my opinions are based directly on my extensive personal experience.

--Ethan

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
... I assure you all of my opinions are based directly on my extensive personal experience.

As are the experiences of those who find your logic, reason and science to be as useless as your constant insistence on blind tests that will make all that nasty "BS product" we like so much disappear. Like suddenly we'll be converted to your religion. And before you start, science is a religion. But you continue to tell us our experiences are ... what? ... something bordering on the libelous?

You've jumped the shark when you have to justify your own existence.

Isn't this a thread about cables?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

"I've seldom seen fuzzies show anywhere near the same interest in haranguing woodies as the other way around..."

I guess Jan is what we call "seldom."

It absolutely takes an equilibirum...otherwise we'd all be oohing and aahing over the three threads in the window sill tweak.

We are, again, a hobby of sharpeners; and there are obviously people who 'sharpen' to ridiculous points. Art mentions the loss of joy associated with this phenomenon, as well.

Radical 'levellers' don't likely get in to Hi Fi in the first place.

Ethan is obviously a sharpener, hence his keen interest in room improvement and insistence on detailed measurement. He just doesn't easily believe someone who says cables make a significant difference in his equation. I may think he's wrong, but he's certainly no leveller. Jan disdains large room treatments, is he a 'leveller' when it comes to what Ethan hears?

Keeping sharpeners from running amok with neurotic claims of special skills may not be 'levelling' so much as it is asking them to prove the thing they are sharpening actually happened.

Is someone who is hallucinating just a sensual sharpeners?

Is anyone who challenges the claim of a sharpener now suspect as a 'leveller?'

What crap.

(Midrant disclaimer - I disagree with Ethan and think components do have different sounds, but jumping on to some new title of 'sharpener' doesn't make a fool any more observant.)

Calling yourself a sharpener proves nothing - remember, both categories of person had to first be able to have an experience that those conducting the study could objectively identify and control - and audio sharpeners don't go for that kind of thing. Those subjects all had exactly the same stimulus offered. Not exactly how we go about things in the hobby, eh?

There were measurable and repeatable stimuli that were offered in the studies. Anathema to most subjectivist audiophiles who would normally cry about the 'test conditions,' yet so long as some audiophile can glom on to a new term he likes, he'll overlook the fact that the study was artificial....looking at a controlled/premeasured/reproduceable/objective figure.

"Well, that's all fine, 'cause now I'm a SHARPENER! Nyah, Ethan!"

I'm surprised the ultra sharpeners accepted the premise that those studies were valid - controlled environment, controlled stimulus, done with visual tests and not audio. Oh, well, just so long as some doofus can pin a 'sharpener' badge on his lapel.

Be careful what you embrace.

The cool part is that we have rabid subjectivists now starting to go along with controlled trials!

Woo Hoo!

Time to do some with audio! All we gotta do is sit those sharpeners down and play them some tunes on a control system, and let them describe the differences they hear i a repeatable manner!

Awesome!

Anyway...

Without belligerent "fuzzies" like Jan, we wouldn't have anyone to compare with DUP at his end of the spectrum!

In a world of only sharpeners, we'd life in a theocracy of arbitrary proclamation; in a world of only levellers, we'd be all be little Nietsches. Either way would be AWFUL!

It's OK, we are moving forward, The Absolute Sound used to 'sharpen' to the point of listing the astrological signs of reviewers.

At one CES, I sat with a guy who told his girlfriend go walk in the courtyard with a 'tweak' device, and was ferkplempt and ecstatic over the impact of the tweak as he perceived her to be turning corners and facing different directions...while she hadn't left yet and was in our bathroom with the tweak sitting still in her purse.

So, it takes all kinds. He's a great guy, and likes new experiences...and, unlike some fuzzies or woodies, can then have a laugh about things.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

So, did ya notice there were only two categories in Art's piece?

I wonder what they'd call someone who 'accurately' described the experience?

Old psych joke:

Tell someone to arrive at a certain time.

If he's late, he's passive agressive.

If he's exactly on time, he's obsessive compulsive.

If he's early, he's anxious.

Gotta watch those psych studies.

Back to Art's report...

Imagine, asked about an asymmetrical figure observed visually; say it's got a 15 degree angle on one side and a 25 degree angle on the other:

Responders who exagerrate the difference (i.e. are wrong) by virtue of overestimating the difference are sharpeners.

Responders who under-report the error (i.e. are wrong) are called levellers.

They are both wrong. Now we have audiophiles wanting to align themselves with a certain type of wrongness?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 53 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Nathan, see if any of this sounds familiar:

[taken from "Zen and the Art of Debunkery (how to debunk anything)"]

*PART 1: GENERAL DEBUNKERY*

<> Employ vague, subjective, dismissive terms such as
"ridiculous" or "trivial" in a manner that suggests they have the full
force of scientific authority. Use of the term BS will often suffice to make your point.

<> Portray science not as an open-ended process of discovery
but as a holy war against unruly hordes of quackery-worshipping
infidels.

<> Keep your arguments as abstract and theoretical as possible.
This will "send the message" that accepted theory overrides any
actual evidence that might challenge it -- and that therefore no such
evidence is worth examining.

<> Reinforce the popular misconception that certain subjects
are inherently unscientific.

<> Always refer to unorthodox statements as "claims," which
are "touted," and to your own assertions as "facts," which are
"stated."

<> Avoid examining the actual evidence. This allows you to say
with impunity, "I have seen absolutely no evidence to support such
ridiculous claims!"

~ Cheerio

mrlowry
mrlowry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: May 30 2006 - 1:37pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

I've always thought that people exaggerate the differences to make them easier to talk about and describe. There's no crime in that. For this hobby is all about subtlety and nuance.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I guess Jan is what we call "seldom." ...

Blah, blah, blah ...

blah, blah, blah ...

blah, blah, blah ...

... can then have a laugh about things

What crap!

And it's tooooo loooong, I can't reeeeeead it allllllll.

LOL!

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I've always thought that people exaggerate the differences to make them easier to talk about and describe. There's no crime in that. For this hobby is all about subtlety and nuance.

Right.

So, are they 'sharpeners' in terms of perception, or just reportage?

You say they are making things easier to talk about and describe; were Art's sharpeners just making things easier to talk about and describe? No, they were distorting an observation.

Difference.

In Art's article, he wasn't describing journalistic hyperbole. He was describing systematic description errors. Neither side was accurate, or just making things easier to talk about and describe!

In the creation of the terms 'sharpener' or 'leveller,' they were describing types of errors in description, not ability to accurately convey nuance and detail.

Art transposed two types of observational error as being accurate descriptors for members of our hobby.

To me, they are still both in error - with nothing to do with how someone phrases a sonic description.

Question:

Which would you prefer, a glowing product review from a 'sharpener,' or a 'leveller?'

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
They are both wrong. Now we have audiophiles wanting to align themselves with a certain type of wrongness?

You must have read a different article than I read.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:

Quote:
I guess Jan is what we call "seldom." ...

Blah, blah, blah ...

blah, blah, blah ...

blah, blah, blah ...

... can then have a laugh about things

What crap!

And it's tooooo loooong, I can't reeeeeead it allllllll.

LOL!

It's OK, over your sharpened head.

Just go type Al Gore or ROTFLMAO a few times to keep yourself feeling in the discussion.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:

Quote:
They are both wrong. Now we have audiophiles wanting to align themselves with a certain type of wrongness?

You must have read a different article than I read.

Probably it was too long for you.

Stick to the first two paragraph's of Art's piece. He's describing two types of error in observational reporting.

Neither type is 'accurate.'

______

(29 words, hope you hung in there.)

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
You say they are making things easier to talk about and describe; were Art's sharpeners just making things easier to talk about and describe? No, they were distorting an observation.

Art didn't write about Sharpeners and Levellers. Robert Duetsch, a retired professor of psychology, wrote about sharpeners and levellers.

I suppose Steve Hoffman is just a stupid knob twiddler and RD is just a know nothing retired psychology professor?

Funny how all that works for you guys.


Quote:
You say they are making things easier to talk about and describe; were Art's sharpeners just making things easier to talk about and describe? No, they were distorting an observation.

Difference.

No, they were describing what they perceived. How do you know what they perceived was not reality? That would make one of the extremes right and the other wrong. That's not what the article outlined as the situation. In this case they were both correct but not in agreement.

Difference.


Quote:
In the creation of the terms 'sharpener' or 'leveller,' they were describing types of errors in description, not ability to accurately convey nuance and detail.

The article was describing people's perception. What they described is what they perceived.

Perception is everything.

No one was asked, at least not according to the context of the article, to "accurately convey nuance and detail." They were asked to describe what they perceived. Nothing more and nothing less.


Quote:
To me, they are still both in error - with nothing to do with how someone phrases a sonic description.

By exagerating the examples provided in the article, you have become a sharpener.

By your own logic you are wrong.

That's too bad. The article had many good points.

You levelled those.

Guess what that makes you.

Wrong!


Quote:
Which would you prefer, a glowing product review from a 'sharpener,' or a 'leveller?'

That would depend on who I am. If I'm a sharpener, I want a review from a fellow sharpener. That's why people read Stereophile.

If I'm a leveller, I would want a review from a leveller. That's why people read Electronic House.

Which brings us back to the question of why someone who doesn't agree with any of the positions of a magazine would care to be on that magazine's forum.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
It's OK, over your sharpened head.

Awwwwww, isn't that cute? Buddha has to resort to insults.

We all know what comes next, and next, and next, and ...

Whatja drinking tonight, Buddha?

How about I just give you a ROTFLMAO and we'll get it out of the way?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 53 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

"Which brings us back to the question of why someone who doesn't agree with any of the positions of a magazine would care to be on that magazine's forum."

Uh, because he likes to troll?

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Probably it was too long for you.

Ha! Called that one right!

What's next, guy, you gonna tell me I'm in Frog's pocket?

You sure know how to run a thread into the ditch.

ROTFLMF'ingAO!

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
"Which brings us back to the question of why someone who doesn't agree with any of the positions of a magazine would care to be on that magazine's forum."

Uh, because he likes to troll?

LOL!

Now you know Winer's just going to say we make a cute couple.

ROTFL ... hell, you guys know the rest.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:

Quote:
You say they are making things easier to talk about and describe; were Art's sharpeners just making things easier to talk about and describe? No, they were distorting an observation.

Art didn't write about Sharpeners and Levellers. Robert Duetsch, a retired professor of psychology, wrote about sharpeners and levellers.

Yikes! My bad.

I suppose Steve Hoffman is just a stupid knob twiddler and RD is just a know nothing retired psychology professor?

Hey, Einstein, I was the one in the thread who used him as an example of someone with good skills. There's your shart attention span again. Or your general blind hate.

Funny how all that works for you guys.


Quote:
You say they are making things easier to talk about and describe; were Art's sharpeners just making things easier to talk about and describe? No, they were distorting an observation.

Difference.

No, they were describing what they perceived. How do you know what they perceived was not reality? That would make one of the extremes right and the other wrong. That's not what the article outlined as the situation. In this case they were both correct but not in agreement.

Difference.

Try again, in the article, both shaperners and levellers could not accurately describe what they saw.

"Accurate" would lie between the two types.


Quote:
In the creation of the terms 'sharpener' or 'leveller,' they were describing types of errors in description, not ability to accurately convey nuance and detail.

The article was describing people's perception. What they described is what they perceived.

Perception is everything.

Everything except for being accurate or extrapolatable to the experiences of others. If perception is everything is correct, then you and Ethan are equally correct if you are describing your perceptions.

No one was asked, at least not according to the context of the article, to "accurately convey nuance and detail." They were asked to describe what they perceived. Nothing more and nothing less.

And I was answering a question that switched from the study results to audio writing, with the other person specifically mentioning the term 'nuance.

Also, what they perceived was not accurate. There was a controlled and verifiable reference for which they erroneously reported their perceptions. They did not accurately describe what they were asked to decsribe. Not a good basis for either side to lay claim to belonging to.


Quote:
To me, they are still both in error - with nothing to do with how someone phrases a sonic description.

By exagerating the examples provided in the article, you have become a sharpener.

I didn't exagerate the examples, I merely stated that neither side was accurate. One type made errors of exageration, one type made errors of minimization. Errors, both.

By your own logic you are wrong.

That's too bad. The article had many good points.

The article is fine, it's an article - it is showing us who thinks we should use erroneous styles of description as positive attributes.

You levelled those.

Guess what that makes you.

Wrong!

This was probably too complex for you, but the article switched from describing types of errors that people make with visual stimuli and morphed into stating that people in and around audio should embrace those errors. I thought the goal of audio was accurate reproduction of a musical event, not endorsing systematic errors in perception.


Quote:
Which would you prefer, a glowing product review from a 'sharpener,' or a 'leveller?'

That would depend on who I am. If I'm a sharpener, I want a review from a fellow sharpener.

So, you want reviews written by someone who erroneously exagerated differences. I believe you, of course - sharpeners were inaccurate. If you need to be told exagerated claims that deviate from accurate description as part of your life, I'm cool with that.

That's why people read Stereophile.

Wrong. People read Stereophile to try and get accurate descriptions of listening experiences.

If I'm a leveller, I would want a review from a leveller. That's why people read Electronic House.

Like I said, we are not really a hobby of levellers. Again, and it's too much for some to grasp. Most audiophiles want accuracy, not error via levelling or sharpening.

Which brings us back to the question of why someone who doesn't agree with any of the positions of a magazine would care to be on that magazine's forum.

I don't know, why are you here?

You've read the magazine's opinion regarding "L'Affaire Belt," you see JA's terrible penchant for measuring things.

Kalman Rubinson uses large room treatments and talks about their beneifit.

The magazine has glowingly reviewed Ethan's products - "In pure audio terms, the MondoTrap wins my highest praise."

They choose Ethan over May!

Think about it. They gave a fabulous review to a product and person you despise. I guess they are 'levellers!'

So, Jan, why do you haunt the forum of a magazine whose ideas you so vehemently hate? Measurements, Real Traps, not May...

Frank S
Frank S's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jan 2 2009 - 2:01pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

I'm reading through this thread all the while wondering if some of you would actually say half the crap you say on an internet forum face to face. I would guess that some would not.
And let's say you did actually stand by your aggressive tone in person, how long till the first punch gets thrown? Would you really go that far because of a discussion or rant about differences in cables? See how ridiculous the childish bickering sounds now?
I'm just posting this as an observer, someone with short exposure to this forum. It seems that every thread I read the same combatants go at it.

ncdrawl
ncdrawl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
Joined: Oct 18 2008 - 9:18am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Jan seems to be in more than most.


Quote:
I'm reading through this thread all the while wondering if some of you would actually say half the crap you say on an internet forum face to face. I would guess that some would not.
And let's say you did actually stand by your aggressive tone in person, how long till the first punch gets thrown? Would you really go that far because of a discussion or rant about differences in cables? See how ridiculous the childish bickering sounds now?
I'm just posting this as an observer, someone with short exposure to this forum. It seems that every thread I read the same combatants go at it.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 53 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

taken from L'affaire Belt:

Belt items included a magic "Electret Brush" which polarizes anything in the direction in which it is brushed. Wiping it the "right" way improves the sound; wiping it the other way makes the sound worse.

John Atkinson felt that he heard a difference between when an LP was "polarized" correctly and incorrectly in a demonstration run by the English magazine Hi-Fi Answers at the show. Jimmy Hughes, chief reviewer of Hi-Fi Answers, was

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
taken from L'affaire Belt:

Belt items included a magic "Electret Brush" which polarizes anything in the direction in which it is brushed. Wiping it the "right" way improves the sound; wiping it the other way makes the sound worse.

John Atkinson felt that he heard a difference between when an LP was "polarized" correctly and incorrectly in a demonstration run by the English magazine Hi-Fi Answers at the show. Jimmy Hughes, chief reviewer of Hi-Fi Answers, was

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I suppose Steve Hoffman is just a stupid knob twiddler and RD is just a know nothing retired psychology professor?

Hey, Einstein, I was the one in the thread who used him as an example of someone with good skills. There's your shart attention span again. Or your general blind hate.

Hey, Chucklehead, I know you brought up Hoffman and I watched you let Winer insult him without uttering a word in Hoffman's defense. So let's not pretend like you are Hoffman's "guy" in all of this, OK?

Look, Buddha, this is the key to understanding what I posted. You get to diminish and insult someone and Winer gets to diminish and insult someone. That's what you guys do. Like flowers in the spring so follows one the other.

I guess "that went over your sharpened little head."

But you still can't resist the insults?! This is how you carry on a discussion when you get backed into a corner, isn't it? The insults start flying and you start drinking. Then there's more insults and then more drinking and then more drinking and then more insults. How many times has this scene been replayed on this forum?


Quote:
Try again, in the article, both shaperners and levellers could not accurately describe what they saw.

"Accurate" would lie between the two types.

Try again yourself, they described exactly what they saw, what their perception told them was "accurate".

"In visual-perception (got that, guy, "perception") research on this topic, when test subjects were presented with an asymetrical figure, some later recalled it in ways that exagerated the figure's asymmetry (Sharpeners) while others minimized or eliminated it (Levelers)."

Nothing about being in error.

"But even among audiophiles, some will describe as "night and day" a sonic difference that to others sounds fairly minor: these are the Sharpeners, whereas the wire-is-wire, bits-is-bits, all-amplifiers-sound-the-same-folks are Levelers."

Perception, Buddha, perception. Not erroneous observation. Perception, period. Both groups acknowledged the figure was asymmetric. Both groups relied on their perception of the figure to describe the extent of its asymetry.

"Perception" of the "event" is what the article is about.

Now, the bits is bits, wire is wire stuff pretty much makes mincemeat of your idea Winer is a Sharpener, doesn't it? And you haven't got any of the rest of the article under your belt either, have you?

What article did you read?


Quote:
If perception is everything is correct, then you and Ethan are equally correct if you are describing your perceptions.

I've never said we weren't both correct in our relative, personal perceptions of what we hear. You and Winer and the others on your "side" have been the ones who have insisted those on my "side" are "idiots", "charlatans", "snake oil salesmen", etc.

From AD's article ...


Quote:
I've seldom seen fuzzies show anywhere near the same interest in haranguing woodies as the other way around (footnote 2). In fact, whenever I see a debate between an average fuzzy and an especially rabid woody ...

I cannot speak for May, Frog, geoff or anyone other than myself but I would not give a dead rat's stinking behind what you or Winer or anyone else thinks about audio or what system you listen to or what you do with anything in your entire life.

For some unknown reason it has always been your "side" that has insisted everyone on my "side" toe the party line and fall in place with the bits is bits, nothing matters but frequency response, noise and distortion, and all cables can do is be defective thinking that you and Winer want as an explanation for everything. I don't care what room treatment you use and I don't give a flip whether Winer uses a $150 receiver or a $200 receiver.

It has always been your side that has insisted things be as you insist they should be. No one here has said you must buy Belt products or you must have ART bowls in your room or a CD demagnetizer anywhere in the same county where you live.

We keep this going only because we do not care to be told we must do as you tell us to do. We resent the idea you will not allow us to do as we please. And we very much dislike your constant insults of BS, snake oil and charlatan. Other than that, you, Winer and all the rest like you can take a flying leap off the nearest tall building as far as I and probably the rest of my "side" are concerned. We do not care what you do as long as you leave us the hell alone.

If you could simply learn to say live and let live and display the slightest amount of tolerance for anyone who disagrees with you, this would all end tonight.


Quote:
The article is fine, it's an article - it is showing us who thinks we should use erroneous styles of description as positive attributes.

What article did you read?


Quote:
This was probably too complex for you, but the article switched from describing types of errors that people make with visual stimuli and morphed into stating that people in and around audio should embrace those errors. I thought the goal of audio was accurate reproduction of a musical event, not endorsing systematic errors in perception.

No, it did not. It introduced the concept of Sharpeners and Levelers in visual perception research and then gave examples of other fields where the two types of perception can be found. Duetsch then argues that "In the extremely competitive field of high performance audio ... " Sharpeners have their value.

I have the article in front of me and I am quoting directly from it. I don't know what article you read but you obviously applied your own biases to the interpretation of what is on the page. You have applied your biases to assume I hate Winer.

Winer creeps me out - I don't like people looking in my front yard, OK? But you are the one who has more than once said I hate Winer. I don't hate Winer, I feel sorry for Winer. Winer only believes in Winer and if that ever goes away, he'll have nothing. Why should I waste my time and energy and spend my life hating someone like that? Is your life so miserable that you spend it hating someone on a frigging audio forum?

Do something real, guy! Get in touch with the real world. It is not about an audio forum.

You have applied your biases to assume many things that are false. And you have then applied your misinterpretations and false assumptions to insist that the rest of us think and act as you and Winer tell us to think and act.


Quote:
Like I said, we are not really a hobby of levellers. Again, and it's too much for some to grasp. Most audiophiles want accuracy, not error via levelling or sharpening.

Fine, stop repeating the same error.


Quote:
Which brings us back to the question of why someone who doesn't agree with any of the positions of a magazine would care to be on that magazine's forum.

I don't know, why are you here?

You've read the magazine's opinion regarding "L'Affaire Belt," you see JA's terrible penchant for measuring things.

Kalman Rubinson uses large room treatments and talks about their beneifit.

The magazine has glowingly reviewed Ethan's products - "In pure audio terms, the MondoTrap wins my highest praise."

They choose Ethan over May!

Think about it. They gave a fabulous review to a product and person you despise. I guess they are 'levellers!'

So, Jan, why do you haunt the forum of a magazine whose ideas you so vehemently hate? Measurements, Real Traps, not May...

Terrific! I ask why someone who stands for everything Stereophile is not is on this forum and you want to use a few sentences from the magazine's 45 year history to show I shouldn't be here. You're a winner, Buddha, at what I don't know, but you're a winner.

I've seen JA say flatly he hears things he cannot understand or explain but he cares to examine why that should be. That is the anti-Winer approach to audio and to life.

I have never seen JA deny something could happen only because he cannot measure it. I haven't seen JA or any other Stereophile writer chase May Belt off the forum, have you?

I've seen JA measure a product that doesn't meet his expectations for exceptional measurements and then I've read a reviewer who either thought that product was wonderful or who thought it was poorly chosen to represent the company.

I have nothing against measurements despite what you and Winer post about me. You and Winer and "your side" on the other hand have every problem with anything you haven't measured which is quite a bit since neither of you will even try any of the things we've discussed in the last year and one half. You have a problem with everything you cannot hear which is quite a bit since you are all levelers and we are sharpeners. You have a problem with anyone who doesn't agree with you and yet will stay on this forum because we aren't going to let you determine when we leave.

In your "blind hatred" of me, you seem to think I have something against room treatments. I don't. I use room treatments. I would assume RealTraps would get good reviews,after all Winer all but lifted ACS's idea intact and made a business for himself. I think ACS makes great products and they don't have to spend their time on a dozen web forums a day knocking the competitor's products in order to sell what they make.

I do object to how ugly Realtraps are when I look at Winer's web page but a lot of people do the same. But I am not against room treatments of whatever sort you care to put in your own room. Like AD says, "Go ahead and get on with your bad selves."

So why won't you guys let me use whatever room treatments I care to use? Why do you have to start screaming about how they can't work because they are not the size of refrigerators? Why does Winer have to belittle every competitor with his free soapbox on this forum?

Why can't you just go your way while I go mine?

That's the bottom line here, you and Winer and the others on your "side" want this to be a battle where there can only be one winner and the looser must lay on the field broken and admit to being a snake oil salesman.

WE DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK!

Our science is what we hear and we do not make a religion of our science. Our very existence will not come to a screeching halt if one scientific "fact" we believe is proven wrong. In fact, we are on the look out for when we might be proven wrong and then we will investigate when that happens. We are curious and we have long ago learned the more we know the more there is to know. None of us care whether you come along for the investigation or not. We would just prefer that if you are not coming with us that you get the hell out of our way.

Screw off, Buddha.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
WE DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK!

Then why are you vandalizing a thread I started?

Don't read my threads. Put me on ignore.

Prove you don't care!

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Can I ask you guys for a favor? I put Jan on my ignore list and ever since then, I've been a much happier, better balanced and productive person. In order for me to maintain this state of Zen, I would very much prefer if you didn't quote him, as this forces me to read the blabbering tomes of nonsense that winds up spewing out of his ass (which somehow seems firmly attached to his head).

Your help and cooperation is greatly appreciated in this matter.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 11 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

I am sure that J. Gordon Holt would have had quite some fun and games, over these past 20 years, commenting on such things as :-

Cryogenic freezing.
Colouring the edge of CDs.
Directionality in wires.
Dieter Ennemoser's C37 lacquer.
Shun Mook devices.
Harmonic Discs.
Shakti Stone.
The lacquer which Sonus Faber use on their speaker cabinets (which they claim is 'friendly to audio').
Nordost ECO 3 liquid.
Applying a demagnetiser to LPs and CDs.
(Small size !!) Room resonance devices.
Aiming a hair dryer containing Tourmaline balls at a CD.
The Schumann Resonance device.

ALL of these things described by many people as 'improving sound'. !!!!!!

Regards,
May Belt.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 11 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

>>> "I've been a professional audio engineer and musician for about 40 years, and I assure you all of my opinions are based directly on my extensive personal experience." <<<

If you, as you say, have been a professional audio engineer for about 40 years, then why is the cryogenic freezing technique included in your 'bullshit' list ????? If you HAVE been listening to and investigating 'sound' for about 40 years, then if you did not know that cryogenic freezing things gives improvements in the sound before 1990, then AFTER 1990 you should certainly have known !!!!! Surely, during the 18 years since Robert Harley's "Cryogenic freezing" article in Stereophile October 1990 issue, you have SERIOUSLY investigated this technique ????????? No ?????????

If not, why not ?????? Have you been waiting for someone to present you with valid measurement proof or present you with authenticated DB test results BEFORE you would investigate ???????? Whilst, during these past 18 years, hundreds (if not thousands worldwide) of other engineers HAVE been investigating that technique.

Since 1990, with anyone and everyone I have had contact with, I have always said that I consider Robert Harley's 1990 article to be one of the most significant articles in the history of audio - alongside Jean Hiraga's article over 30 years ago describing his experience that different cables could sound different. And yet, you Ethan, have the cryogenic freezing technique included on your 'bullshit' list.

So, Ethan, back to your comment "and I assure you all of my opinions are based directly on my extensive personal experience." This must mean that your extensive personal experience puts the cryogenic treatment on a 'bullshit' list !!!!!!!!

Regards,
May Belt.

JSBach
JSBach's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 28 2008 - 1:25am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I am sure that J. Gordon Holt would have had quite some fun and games, over these past 20 years, commenting on such things as :-
Cryogenic freezing.
Colouring the edge of CDs. ....etc


A bizarre list of occult practices but I'd question Shakti Stones being included simply on the basis of my personal experience. Placing them on the transformers in my Audio Research power amp did make an improvement I could hear. Now I'm normally very , vary skeptical about all manner of tweeks but placing a large mass over audio transformers does appear to make sense. I also affected an improvement by wrapping a large lump of iron in a wooden case and placing it on top of the Audio Research's transformers. OK, I'm not aware of any science that might explain this but one thing I'm certain of, both the Shakti Stones and my home made thingamies made an audible improvement. Maybe it was something very simple like the windings being loose and the simple application of weight stabilizing them? I have no idea. Using the same devices on the power transformers of solid state amps I had at the time affected no improvement that I could hear. Go figure.
However, if anyone catches me applying Mpingo disks to my walls they have my permission to have me carted off to the funny farm.

PLEASE MR MOD, CAN WE PLEASE MOVE THIS FLAME THROWING COMPETITION TO THE OPEN BAR SECTION?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 53 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

"A bizarre list of occult practices but I'd question Shakti Stones being included simply on the basis of my personal experience. Placing them on the transformers in my Audio Research power amp did make an improvement I could hear."

Funny how personal experience can change one's bias toward these "occult practices." Hands on experience as opposed to dismissing them out of hand. :-)

"Now I'm normally very, very skeptical about all manner of tweaks but placing a large mass over audio transformers does appear to make sense."

Mass loading, while an excellent example of a "good sense explanation," is not the operating theory of the Shakti Stone.

"OK, I'm not aware of any science that might explain this but one thing I'm certain of, the Shakti Stone...made an audible improvement."

So, it's NOT necessary to know the science behind a tweak in order for it to work? Hmmmm, interesting..... :-) BTW the Shakti patent is available on line. CAUTION: crystals on board!

"However, if anyone catches me applying Mpingo disks to my walls they have my permission to have me carted off to the funny farm."

Of course, if you played around with a Mpingo disc, who knows, you might come around to the same conclusion you did with the Shakti Stone - that it's good for the sound!

Cheers

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Then why are you vandalizing a thread I started?

Don't read my threads. Put me on ignore.

Vandalizing?! Oh, I didn't realize your weak little "Triple WTF" cry for an explanation from Winer meant no one else could join in on the fun and games.

That's what PM's are for, Buddha. You don't want someone else to join in, you put it in a PM. It's another one of those wonderful valu-pak items the forum offers to people who just don't want to be bothered by anyone saying you're being insulting - again! That way you and Winer can say whatever you want about "the other side" and no one will know and most of all no one will care. Put it in the open and this is what you get. Are you really going to tell me you didn't expect this?

Triple WTF!!!

Now, the proper response to my post would have acknowledged that you realize we've been down this road a dozen times in the last eighteen months and nothing ever comes of these threads because you and Winer usually get to the point where all you have left are insults.

The proper response would have acknowledged that there isn't a crime being committed if someone decides of their own free will to place a Shakti Stone on their amplifier or Mpingo discs in their room.

The proper response would have acknowledged that "your side" has been out of control in these threads.

Then you would have been man enough to say let's call this crap off. Then we could go about our business without someone constantly screaming about charlatans and snake oil. Then threads wouldn't get "vandalized" and no one would waste other people's time reading 50 pages of crap. Then people wouldn't come into a thread asking why this is happening.

But, no, you want to be placed on "ignore". You and Winer on "ignore". Well, at least you didn't look in my front yard and link me to Nazi's in your attempt. I'll give you that much.

But putting both of you on ignore is like handing Nixon the keys to the Watergate. You're both dishonest about all of this. When you get called on it you can only resort to insults and DBT's.

Why don't you just realize this is a waste of time. People are going to do what they want to do and you have no control over that.

What makes this any of your business whether someone uses ART cups in their room?

Why don't you just let this drop? What is it that makes you continue saying the same crap in each thread?

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 11 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

>>> "I'd question Shakti Stones being included simply on the basis of my personal experience. Placing them on the transformers in my Audio Research power amp did make an improvement I could hear. Now I'm normally very , vary skeptical about all manner of tweeks but placing a large mass over audio transformers does appear to make sense." <<<

The Shakti Stone device was included in my list PRECISELY because it has nothing to do with placing a large mass over audio transformers !!! It may be called a 'Stone' but as far as I am aware it is something with passive circuitry i.e nothing inside it functioning until the passive components in the circuitry are activated by any stray electromagnetic field coming from the equipment. Then, as I understand it, the secondary electromagnetic field being generated by the activated circuitry inside the Shakti Stone creates a 'contra energy field' against the original energy field from the equipment.

>>> "OK, I'm not aware of any science that might explain this but one thing I'm certain of, both the Shakti Stones and my home made thingamies made an audible improvement." <<<

You mean you actually have the courage to 'post' that you have heard an audible improvement - even though you are not aware of any science which might explain it !!! Bravo I say, Bravo !!!

As Geoff states "Who knows, if you played around with a Mpingo disc, you might come around to the same conclusion you did with the Shakti Stone - that it's good for the sound!"

Regards,
May Belt.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Please, Mr. Bach, realize you've been doing this with half your brain disconnected. How long is it going to take before everyone realizes there are things that matter? How long before everyone realizes there are things that make improvements? There are things we can't easily explain by looking to the past, by drawing on only what we already know?

This is where a part of you either dies because you've based your entire ego around knowing everything and having everything in a logical place or a part of you comes to life because you realize there is so much more to know.

Not one person here agrees with the uber-cynic about everything. People hear improvements when cables are swapped. People hear improvements when after market power cables are placed in a system. People get it when they use Shakti Stones, Mpingo discs, ART bowls, Belt devices, CD demagnetizers and the list goes on and on. But with each exception each person makes too many still want to shout snake oil about the rest. You don't agree with ncdrawl about this and ncdrawl doesn't agree with Winer about that. Why? Because you've tried them and heard the improvements. When people try something, they can hear whether there is an improvement or there isn't. They have to put their old knowledge aside and accepted that there is an improvement, there is something to this. If you rely on only what you already know, you'll never know anything more.

So what makes a Shakti Stone different than a Mpingo disc? Maybe because you think you can rationalize away how the Stone works? geoff will tell you you're wrong, you're working with the old half of your brain.

Is the problem with these alternatives that you have to realize there might be someone smarter about something than you? You can do that with an amplifier but not with a "Stone"? Is it all ego that needs to be dropped so you can put that Stone on your amplifier and just listen? Listen without rationalizing how the Stone works?

What is it that makes you try to explain something new with your old knowledge? I've seen all sorts of people try to give "old school" explanations for why something improves their sound system and most of them never come close to saying, "I don't know how it works, I just know it works."

So tell me this, why'd you obtain the Stone? What made you curious enough to try something you didn't think was going to work if your lump of metal worked just as well?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:

Quote:
Then why are you vandalizing a thread I started?

Don't read my threads. Put me on ignore.

Vandalizing?! Oh, I didn't realize your weak little "Triple WTF" cry for an explanation from Winer meant no one else could join in on the fun and games.

That's what PM's are for, Buddha. You don't want someone else to join in, you put it in a PM. It's another one of those wonderful valu-pak items the forum offers to people who just don't want to be bothered by anyone saying you're being insulting - again! That way you and Winer can say whatever you want about "the other side" and no one will know and most of all no one will care. Put it in the open and this is what you get. Are you really going to tell me you didn't expect this?

Triple WTF!!!

Now, the proper response to my post would have acknowledged that you realize we've been down this road a dozen times in the last eighteen months and nothing ever comes of these threads because you and Winer usually get to the point where all you have left are insults.

The proper response would have acknowledged that there isn't a crime being committed if someone decides of their own free will to place a Shakti Stone on their amplifier or Mpingo discs in their room.

The proper response would have acknowledged that "your side" has been out of control in these threads.

Then you would have been man enough to say let's call this crap off. Then we could go about our business without someone constantly screaming about charlatans and snake oil. Then threads wouldn't get "vandalized" and no one would waste other people's time reading 50 pages of crap. Then people wouldn't come into a thread asking why this is happening.

But, no, you want to be placed on "ignore". You and Winer on "ignore". Well, at least you didn't look in my front yard and link me to Nazi's in your attempt. I'll give you that much.

But putting both of you on ignore is like handing Nixon the keys to the Watergate. You're both dishonest about all of this. When you get called on it you can only resort to insults and DBT's.

Why don't you just realize this is a waste of time. People are going to do what they want to do and you have no control over that.

What makes this any of your business whether someone uses ART cups in their room?

Why don't you just let this drop? What is it that makes you continue saying the same crap in each thread?

Let it drop?

I started a thread about cables sounding different from one another, Ethan replied with what he was the reason (being a sharpener about what might be occurring,) your first reply was one of your 'big three:' nothing but quotes.

You then proceeded to number two of your 'big three:' "ROTFLMAO."

You added nothing but thread pollution and invective aimed at Ethan. Even being nice to you couldn't keep your bile in its bladder.

Go back through page one.

Stop stalking Ethan.

You are an angry, small, contaminant on this thread.

I'd be happy to PM you about it.

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Ethan is obviously a sharpener, hence his keen interest in room improvement and insistence on detailed measurement.


Indeed!


Quote:
He just doesn't easily believe someone who says cables make a significant difference ... I disagree with Ethan and think components do have different sounds


Cables can sound different, and so can gear. I never said otherwise. However, cables and gear that are working properly, and amps that have enough power for the task, should all sound identical. This is a big distinction, and I'm sure I've made the point before.

Regardless, "sharpeners versus levelers" is not an accurate set of labels IMO. It's more like skeptics who demand proof, versus believers who continue to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

--Ethan

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
If you, as you say, have been a professional audio engineer for about 40 years, then why is the cryogenic freezing technique included in your 'bullshit' list ?????


Because it IS bullshit! I define bullshit as any product that does not do what it claims. In this case the claims are to improve the sound.


Quote:
Have you been waiting for someone to present you with valid measurement proof or present you with authenticated DB test results BEFORE you would investigate ????????


Yes, exactly. So show me what you have and I'll be glad to give it my consideration.

--Ethan

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Let it drop?

Yes, that's what I said. What's so difficult to understand about that?


Quote:
I started a thread about cables sounding different from one another, Ethan replied with what he was the reason (being a sharpener about what might be occurring,) ...

So even when I quote from the article, "But even among audiophiles, some will describe as "night and day" a sonic difference that to others sounds fairly minor: these are the Sharpeners, whereas the wire-is-wire, bits-is-bits, all-amplifiers-sound-the-same-folks are Levelers", you insist what you have interpreted is correct?

I think there's a basic problem of communication here.


Quote:
.... your first reply was one of your 'big three:' nothing but quotes.

Uh-huh! I posted three quotes from your op. And a smile.

What now you find smiles insulting?!

This is getting weird, dude.


Quote:
You added nothing but thread pollution and invective aimed at Ethan.

Invective? I posted that if Winer doesn't care to think about what others post, he will never understand what others post. Pretty simple stuff.

Then I posted this ...


Quote:

Quote:
You and Geoff would make a perfect couple.

Ethan

Don't start that stuff again, Winer. Your pseudo-homophobic undies are showing. What is it they say about those who protest too much?

Oh, yeah. Now, about that "refuting you" think you keep asking for ...

Uh uh.

If Winer wants to keep up with his homo-phobic slurs, then he's going to get called on it. I'm really, really sorry that upset your little princess.

"Awwww, she's so upset, awwww, she's crying, awww, baaaaabeeee, it's alright, nobody's going to make you think about those big bad homo-phobes. Now you just stop your crying and put your widdle head down on that nice soft, pink pillow and go to sleep.

OR I'LL BEAT THE LIVN'CRAP OUT OF YOU!!!!!"


Quote:
Even being nice to you couldn't keep your bile in its bladder.

You mean bile like this ...


Quote:
Why comment on something merely biased by misguided opinion and not based in anything realistic? You're "sure" the player had a properly designed output stage. As you would say, please clarify this and be as specific as possible. Have you ever owned or tested this player? If not, how are you "sure" of its design?

I notice Winer didn't answer whether he had ever owned or tested this player. Winer never answers those kind of questions - neither do you.

But he was "certain" it was defective. So now I am not allowed to call Winer on his oversteps and exagerations or outright lies? Good way to want to run a forum, guy. As JA says, "It a good thing you're not the moderator."

And you know what's wrong with you being "nice", Buddha? I can't trust you. You have shown on more than one occasion that you will turn on me and insult me when I'm trying to initiate a discussion. Do you need me to go back to previous threads and call up some quotes? Like your two page long rant about me being Frog's puppet? Like most of the crap you posted in the "size" and "perception" threads?

When you're being "nice" I know what's coming next.

When you change, I'll consider changing what I expect from you.


Quote:
Go back through page one.

I just did and I just told you what's there. Why don't you go read it again and this time try not to look so pissed off and so biased.

Look, if we're headed into the stretch on this thread and this is where you break out the nonsense and insults, then why don't you just bow out now? We've all seen what happens when you have nothing left to stand on and you resort to insults. How many times do you intend to replay that scene on this forum?


Quote:
Stop stalking Ethan.

ROTFLMAO!!!! Big Time! ROTFLMF'ingAO!!!!!

Where the hell have you been? Winer Googles my name so he can post BS comments and a MySpace page that have nothing to do with me but are full of insults. Winer looks in my backyard and Googles my address and phone number. Winer links me to Nazi's.

All of which you objected to at the time it occurred.

And I'm stalking Winer?!!!

I've said this before but I'll say it again. There is no point in trying to discuss anything with anyone who simply makes shit up.

For Godssake, Buddha, get some help here. This hatred you have for me is not healthy. It ate up dup. Now it's doing the same to you and Winer. I'm another member on an audio forum. That's all. Let it go, guy.


Quote:
You are an angry, small, contaminant on this thread.

I find myself repeating this far too often ...

ROTFLMF'ingAO!!!!!

OK, repetition is soooooo boring. Try this "Buddha, You are an angry, small, contaminant on this forum who makes shit up and turns to insults when he's cornered."

Any better?


Quote:
I'd be happy to PM you about it.

Nah, this BM was enough for me to have you figured out.

Now, how about dropping this crap? I'll ask again ...


Quote:
What makes this any of your business whether someone uses ART cups in their room?

Why don't you just let this drop? What is it that makes you continue saying the same crap in each thread?

I know you don't like to answer these unconfortable questions and you typically ignore them, but this time I'd like an answer.

What the hell's wrong with you, guy?

And what the hell does this have to do with swapping cables at CES?

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
However, cables and gear that are working properly, and amps that have enough power for the task, should all sound identical. This is a big distinction, and I'm sure I've made the point before.

And we've pointed out that no one else on this forum agrees with you. Now about basing your conclusions on "personal experience" ...


Quote:
It's more like skeptics who demand proof, versus believers who continue to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Glad to see you've dropped the "know it all" from the "believers" crap. I guess the irony of that "Hell, I do know everything" quote of your's finally sunk in, eh?

OK, now about "the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary".

Does that evidence include 45 years of subjective review magazines? Does it include 30 years of cable reviews? Does it include the SS, JVS and JA stating clearly the ART system had a positive effect?

I mean, I'm seeing a trend here. How about you?

Or are these your irrefutable proofs?

Good news, it's working for me!

JSBach
JSBach's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 28 2008 - 1:25am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
So, it's NOT necessary to know the science behind a tweak in order for it to work? Hmmmm, interesting..... :-) BTW the Shakti patent is available on line. CAUTION: crystals on board!

As someone else pointed out somewhere on this flame war, manufacturers often make peculiar claims about why their devices work knowing they are false in order to put potential competition off the track. Additionally peculiar and unique claims are often required just to get a patent registered.

Quote:
"However, if anyone catches me applying Mpingo disks to my walls they have my permission to have me carted off to the funny farm."
Of course, if you played around with a Mpingo disc, who knows, you might come around to the same conclusion you did with the Shakti Stone - that it's good for the sound!

I'm in the 'lucky?' position of having a close friend work as an audio/HT reviewer (don't ask) who lends me all manner of peculiar tweeks with the intention of finding out if I hear anything. If I had to pay for things like Mpingo disks my skepticism would prevent me risking my money. And no, I heard no difference wherever I put the silly things. Others may through the power of auto-suggestion or by stuffing them in their ears as treble controls.
Cheers.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 53 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

"Manufacturers often make peculiar claims about why their devices work knowing they are false in order to put potential competition off the track."

That's SO silly! You know, there's such as thing as being too skeptical. Give me an example of a manufacturer who actually made false claims. You people are constantly accusing manufacturers of all manner of things. Such little gossips!! Ha Ha Ha

"Peculiar and unique claims are often required just to get a patent registered."

What are you talking about? Is this one of those semantic games you people play? LOL

"If I had to pay for things like Mpingo disks my skepticism would prevent me risking my money."

Yeah, the Mpingos are REAL EXPENSIVE. You big fat liar!! So, not only are you a cynic you're cheap? LOL

"And no, I heard no difference wherever I put the silly things."

Undoubtedly you were not given the silly instructions.

"Others may through the power of auto-suggestion or by stuffing them in their ears as treble controls."

Your anger and jealousy are showing.

Ta, ta for now

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
I notice Winer didn't answer whether he had ever owned or tested this player. Winer never answers those kind of questions - neither do you.

Earth to Jan. I was the one who mentioned that it was the player that we used for the project. To some, that might imply listening to it. To you, maybe not.

Did you notice how we mentioned the brands of the cables, as well? (Likely not.)

"Brand X" was just that. Nonbranded interconnect.

There are even pictures of the system on another thread about the speakers we used.

I am not afraid to mention the gear I listen to. Neither is Ethan.

Maybe you could join the party?

Or would that limit your sniping opportunities?

I notice Geoff and May don't post about what they listen to at home, either.

Hmmmm.

You are full of comments about this topic. So, your own question back at ya: have you ever listened to the gear in question?

If not, then how can YOU comment but not Ethan?

Regale us with your experience of the Purist Audio Design Aqueous Anniversary interconnect as it relates to the Straightwire Maestro interconnect, listened to via Ferguson Hill FH007/8 speakers and the Modwright Denon-based CD/SACD playerin your specific experience.

If you can't, then you should climb off Ethan for doing the same thing you do.

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Oh Buddha, you're just so damn reasonable!

--Ethan

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

Buddha,

I applaud your patience and willingness to engage in discourse with JV.

However, the forum is much more pleasant and succinct with him on ignore

To which I am sure JV would respond: you are close minded blah blah, you can't follow my ideas blah blah (for at least a page.
Then I could respond , Geoff and may aren't on ignore, but that would send JV on another 10 posts of rants

Again, I applaud your zen like patience.

Frank S
Frank S's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jan 2 2009 - 2:01pm
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at


Quote:
Give me an example of a manufacturer who actually made false claims. You people are constantly accusing manufacturers of all manner of things. Such little gossips!! Ha Ha Ha

Geoff, Is'nt this your "claim"? Taken from your website.

"The Teleportation Tweak will also improve any video systems in the house, including plasma, HDTV and high end projection systems - better contrast, color saturation and resolution."

Cheerio.

ncdrawl
ncdrawl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
Joined: Oct 18 2008 - 9:18am
Re: Well, this should be non-controversial: Cable experiment at

I havent seen Mr. Winer mention your backyard, Jan.

pardon me if I am missing something

Pages

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