| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
I have no reason not to audition the files and comment.
You have every reason. You're afraid of choking, and getting it wrong, and once again proving what many here already know about your complete lack of listening skills.
I'm the most open and honest person in this forum. Versus the name-calling chickens who know they can't really hear what they claim.
Ethan, Naked Emperor, Buballah... who are you trying to kid? I don't know about you, but I don't have Alzheimers. You've proven to be the most narrow-minded and dishonest person on this forum. Don't make me bring up your disingenuous backpeddaling behaviour over last year's blind test fiasco that I challenged you to. Which cemented your reputation on this forum for dishonesty and shameless cowardice in the name of blind tests, which you nevertheless hypocritically demand from others now. One need look no further than the fact that unlike me, you've never even risked taking a blind test challenge in your history on this forum. Your own combative rhetoric fits you more than anyone else: "when challenged to prove you can really hear, you hide behind endless excuses and more name-calling."
If you continue to blame me when the problem is clearly not at my end, that just proves how disingenuous you are
Don't think you can use the word "disingenuous" on anyone for any reason, because you see everyone using it to describe you these days. Doesn't work that way. Your friend Arny said it took him "numerous attempts over a period fo about half a day to download all four of your files, due to the (probably intentional) flakiness of the file sharing site". Which is what you can expect for FC's files, but while you're not willing to go to the trouble and patience required to get those, you expect people to go to the same trouble to get YOUR files?? THIS just proves how disingenuous you are. And NO, I don't think everyone on the planet should mail you CD's because unlike most of us, you're too incompetent to figure out how to download or play some digital audio files, which you're supposed to be a freakin' professional at, let me remind you. (It's utterly shameful that you would even admit that you can't do a simple thing like download and play a couple of audio files, which somehow, everyone else here who doesn't claim to be an audio pro with a computer and recording studio in his basement can do). Like I told you, get a 10 year old on your block to download them for you, rather than expect everyone else to bend over backwards for you, while you're begging everyone to download your files.
Furthermore, FC posted those files on one of the internet's most popular file hosts. It's "funny" how thousands of users are able to download files from that site every day, and how every single time you say it's not working I go and check it and it's up, and how those of us who did take the test were able to get and play the files... but not you. So you're right. I guess in the end it really does come down to honesty! And also the fear of embarassing yourself (further). Obviously the reason you're avoiding this test, is because you know you can't fall back on your usual "I don't hear any differences, ergo, no differences there are". For if you say that, and its later revealed by FC that one of us identified correctly, then you'll have proven once again that you can't hear straight.
IF YOU CONTINUE TO USE THIS COP-OUT EXCUSE THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO DOWNLOAD FRESH CLIP'S FILES ETHAN, HERE'S WHAT I -WILL- DO FOR YOU:
I will download them myself and then upload them to another site that is not "flaky" and easy to download from, and give you the links. So either you download FC's files yourself and take his challenge, or agree to me helping you in this way and download them from my site. Just don't make any more excuses why you can't obtain these files after SIXTEEN #$%! WEEKS!
Ethan wrote to Jan: Not at all Jan. My entire argument is that the same people who insist they can distinguish Before from After are unable to do so when they aren't told in advance which is which. This could be settled immediately, but those people will never participate because they know they can't really hear a difference. So in the end I guess it really does come down to honesty!
That is again uncannily ironic of you, Ethan. For that is my exact argument against you. You who has refused requests from several members for weeks now, to take Fresh Clip's test challenge, and offered up excuses again about how you couldn't download it (while the rest of us are able to).
Those changes were applied by Mike to both samples.
Therefore, they did *not* add any differences of their own to any pre-existing differences between the samples.
One could argue that Mikes processing added masking, but the basic mechanical vinyl record/playback process is fraught with so much clearly audible noise, distortion, and masking that the masking in the other processing that Mike used should be moot.
I am of course presuming that Mike's work was competent. If you wish to argue that Mike is not competent to transcribe LPs, then that would be up to you.
My own impression is that Mike did a good job of the basic transcriptions. I like the music and think it is pretty well recorded, all things considered.
Changing AIFF files to .WAV files should not involve changing the data. AIFF and WAV files differ in terms of the structure of the data but not in terms the contents of the samples, in a case like this.
Trimming files does not change the data that is not trimmed off.
This is actually an admission that our favorite amphibian has been croaking about nothing. If he has to download the files, then obviously he has not yet downloaded them. He therefore has no idea what it takes to download them.
Frog has been berating Ethan based on Frog's imagination.
I downloaded the files. The first 2 were easy, but it took me about half a day to download the remaining 2 because the site was too busy to let me download them.
Once I downloaded all 4 files, I found that they were bit-perfect copies of each other.
... the music is not very pleasant-sounding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Several possible explanations:
(1) Recorded on vacuum tube equipment.
(2) Recorded in the days when vinyl was all we had and recording engineers could get away with careless work because the inhrent noise and distortion in vinyl masked it."
~ Funny! Excellent tongue in cheek response.
You spent all day downloading a few files? bit-by-bit copies? That took a lot of work.
Arnie, arnie, arnie! That's your idea of abusing me? "Tube amps sound bad." "Vinyl sounds bad"
C'mon, arrrrrrrnie, get with the game plan. Whoops! No, you can't, can you? 'Cause you said you weren't paying attention to me. But you are. See? I'm waaaaaay more "relevant" to this than even I expected to be. You wouldn't have any BS to contribute at this point if I hadn't had something for you to pay attention to.
No need to thank me, Arrrrnie. And, please, no need to add more blather as a response. We're into forty whatever GD BS pages now and you don't want to try to drive this into the ditch now. We're on to you, arrrnie and more BS isn't going to change that. Take it like a man. You said you weren't going to look and you looked. Believe me, I've been ignored by every swingingdi ... by plenty of people better than you, arnie. And they all come back to look because they want to know what I have to say. You're just one more pidgeon that got picked off the roof.
Loveya', arrrrrnie. Have a nice Mother's Day and make your momma proud of her little troll. Take the day off - like that's gonna happen.
Just to be clear Arny, you're talking about the four long files Fresh_Clip posted, not my 10-second excerpts, yes? In that case I'm sorry I even wasted the time to download the first two files and trying endlessly to get the other two.
Thanks for confirming what I already suspected. Even if the files were slightly different from being different LP passes, I'm sure they'd sound the same.
--Ethan
I already explained that. If they don't believe it from me, they won't believe it from you either. I'm certain that John Atkinson understands this, but clearly mrlowry and Lamont are clueless about digital audio.
It kills me when people who have no idea what they're talking about express such strong uninformed opinions. It's okay not to know something, but when you don't even know that you don't know it becomes pathetic. Alas, such is the world of audiophooles.
--Ethan
Excuse me, idiot, but I'm talking here about downloading Fresh Clip's files, not Ethan's. Of course, this was all before you and your "DBT witnesses" came marching over from your Hydrogen Audio forum to do battle with us "audiophools" here, so that's why you're so ignorant of what I'm talking to Ethan about. I already downloaded Ethan's files too, and before you stick your big foot in your mouth again as your friend is often want to do, I already presented my "guesses" about FC's files to the forum weeks ago. In case that still doesn't register in the ol' Kroaker noggin, it means I downloaded those too. The reason I told your DBT church brother I would download his files -again-, is because I am not at home and don't have access to the files I downloaded.
I hope you do better in your attempts to attack me without provocation next time (troll), but if you're hoping to score any points in your little trolling battles against me, learn not to cut five words out of someone's line and take things out of context, and learn how to read before you misrepresent my words again. Remember you're not on RAO here, so your "dirty debating tricks" are not going to go over so well.
Speaking of FC's test files, your friend Ethan has thus far proved to be coward extraordinaire for making excuses for not being able to download them. Yet you were able to download his files, and by your description, they are no easier to download than FC's. Furthermore, you asked for a link to FC's files, which I generously gave you. So the question remains, are YOU brave enough to take the FC CD Demag blind test challenge yourself, one you can't cheat at? Or do you shudder in a dark corner hoping no one will speak of it again, like your tag team buddy Ethan?
Thank you for confirming once again what I've been saying all along. Ethan's files are a waste of time to test. Croak.
You'd be wasting your time because Arny already said that all four files are bit for bit identical. FC's files that is, not my files! My files are not bit identical because some are Before and some are After.
Thanks again Arny!
And still The Toadstool and Lamont and the others are terrified to say which of my excerpts are Before and which are After. Amazing.
My work here is done.
--Ethan
Your work here isn't done. You just need to go back to your lair and get one of your butt-buddies to pull your string again. Ethan, the little string-pulled windup troll.
I had been off this forum for a few days and come back to find this thread over 40 pages long so something has to have happened (or someone has to have become very pissed). My opinion on the device in question is that it makes a change and no one posting so far (page 15) has a clue why. I look forward to reading the rest of this very long thread.
Oh happy day!!
Ethan thinks he found a lock-tight sure-fire way of wriggling (you know, like a worm?) out of the challenge put to him, to take FC's demag test.
Nice try, Ethan. Like I already publicly stated, I knew in advance that you would never take the challenge, so it was only a question of what cowardly excuse you'd use to back out of it. Understand this: NOTHING will excuse you from taking FC's challenge; as I and Jan long since have. Least of all this. In the first place, Arny was talking about YOUR files, not FC's. He did not mention FC in the message I read. Although you might have emailed him and told him to say it was FC's. But even if he did clearly specify he was talking about FC's files, it doesn't change -anything-. The challenge was not to analyze the files objectively, but to listen to them subjectively. So if a consensus is reached, it will tell you more than any objective measurements can, and may point to flaws in objective measurements. You know, just as there were "flaws" in your objective measurements over MF's files.
I've listened to your files and FC's and the differences between his files and those between yours are far more significant, so your lame copout excuse doesn't fly. Moreover, you claim FC's are grossly different, and still you say you can't hear differences between them. So you can't hear differences between files you claim show great differences in measurement, and those you claim are bit-identical. And still you're trying to convince us you're not stone deaf, and have all these "perfessional listenin' skillz" are you? If you can't hear differences in test files that measure differently, according to every single person who measured them, and you say you won't try to test files you claim are the same (even though you know you're being disingenuous to because you're afraid of having your listening skills challenged), then why do you even talk about test file challenges up and down the place? Just stick to the acoustics forum and stop making a fool of yourself.
If YOUR files that you are begging everyone to listen to are so different, then how about I rename and repost them, and YOU take your stupid test challenge? You won't accept that, because you know you'll fall flat on your face once again.
Then there's this fact: I don't know what you know about your DBT church buddy Arny, but I can tell you he has at least a 15 year history of being proven to have lied to discussion group members more times than anyone cares to keep count of at this point. All in the name of his sacred "ABX wars". Like most people here, I trust Fresh Clip not to be lying about the files, than a career troll like Arny. So I don't care what he says about FC's files, unless he is willing to actually listen to them and submit his subjective conclusion about their differences.
So no, again, none of this excuses you from the FC challenge.
Edit: Plus I just checked and the files are not identical.
More name-calling and childish taunts. Wonderful! You've been having a great meltdown this week, Ethan. Sure to be remembered fondly.
"And still Arny and Ethan and the DBT boyz are terrified to say which of FC's excerpts are Before and which are After".
Now it rings true!
Yet it doesn't bother you when you do it. How ironic.
So if that's how you feel, what are you doing here on the Stereophile forum??
I agree with that 100%...the hobby is one of hype, snake oil, astounding price, and meaningless hyperbole as much as amazing gear and music.
But look how cheap you can buy Marlboro's off this forum.
I'd want 100% performance when someone says something like "order of magnitude improvement in detail," or "like svereal veils being lifted," or "night and day improvement"....
Superlatives like those should imply something beyond a rather low percentage chance of being able to identify a model in question, seventy percent likelihood of identification is terrible!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I agree with that 100%...the hobby is one of hype, snake oil, astounding price, and meaningless hyperbole as much as amazing gear and music."
These comments express a sentiment that's quite common IMO, and very understandable, among the general rank and file of the hobby who've have been toiling away, selecting their gear diligently, doing their best, but who are light years behind what is achievable and what other folks have actually achieved. One need look no further for an indictment, as it were, of the general state of audio systems today than JA's expression the other day on this thread: "Flat, lifeless and uninvolving." Not too surprising the rank and file have such a hard time coming to grips with expressions of shock and awe from above when it comes to tweaks. The consensus of the rank and file seems to be, Why futz around with these tweaks (that noone can even explain) if we're already 3-5 % from perfection?
To pour salt on the wounds, not to belabor the point too much, there's the rather sticky situation of George Tice's 4 Reasons Why Audiophiles Get Poor Results with Tweaks. It's not terribly surprising test scores are frequently so low.
"An ordinary man has no means of deliverance." Wm Burroughs
Sort of mirrors my opinion of cable changes. I hear a change, others don't. May be their gear or ears are better than mine, ...or worse.
Is this not both paranoid and a tad egotistic...Is it not possible he simply wanted to see if you could put your ears where your keyboard is...to see if you could prove your contention. If you could Ethan would look pretty silly. As you avoided the challenge, you appear to have the weaker position...
I do not have a dog in this fight. I began figuring there was some unknown effect from the absurdly expensive toy that did make a difference. I still believe the same but my system is not nearly good enough to tell such a difference (despite all the 'night and day' hyperbole)and my background is not such that I can see through pseudo scientific BS of A/B comparison problems.
If you take his test and answer correctly, then you ave pretty much won the discussion. If you won't, continued argument is moot.
Amen.
I do agree that clipping is a big factor in the poor quality of modern masterings, but small amounts of clipping for transient stuff (percussion) is not generally audible. ie, up to maybe 2ms (88 samples). This covers a lot of ground. A lot of Deutsche Grammophon classical CDs recorded in the last few years have substantial amounts of clipping; while it does bug me, I can't say I can hear any particularly identifiable sonic flaw because of it.
Much of the poor sound coming from clipping comes from the clipping of melodic instruments like guitar/piano/vocals, where clipping is far more audible. But most mastering commentary on waveforms doesn't really take all this into account, and just says "0db = BAD!". Of course it's objectively better if the clipping wasn't there to begin with, and would make me feel better about the mastering (even before I even listened to it). But I think I'm trending more on the subjective side of the camp here than the objective side, and I will say that while measurements can say good things there, they are very often misapplied.
BTW, I do have some unmastered recordings lying around with mastered versions for comparison, which someday I need to package up and demonstrate what I'm talking about with them. In that case, IIRC, shaving off 9db of dynamic range yields little audible impact.
I disagree. A 25% chance of guessing correctly (with one person trying) doesn't really prove anything.
So, then, a finely tuned tweak inventor such as yourself should be better than the rank and file.
Perhaps you will be the savior of the hobby from, "66% of the time, I could tell a difference."
Are you finally the savant who can do it?
I mean, how else would you be able to decide how many brilliant pebbles to put in a baggie if you can't consistently hear pebble to pebble differences?
While the possibility that Arny got lucky certainly makes it plausible that you got lucky, a bass difference is what one should be focusing on here. But for that matter, wouldn't the fact that the same music was replayed twice set up an expectation bias? Clearly they did it for some reason, and a pressing difference would be a pretty plausible reason. So sure, very interesting anecdote, and not meaningless, and you may very well have heard something, but I'll still take it with a grain of salt, thank you.
You tell me. Lots of HA people have no trouble ABXing modern encoders at 128kbps. I did it for the listening test last year (albeit I did it with a rather infamous problem sample). But the fact that utterly pithy, pedestrian, common descriptors as "flat", "lifeless", and "uninvolving" were applied to the MP3s (with lord knows what encoder you're using - are you still using Audition?) makes me honestly wonder if anybody there actually heard anything - with a potentially inferior encoding at that. This anecdote really does make me question the listening abilities of those listeners, which really does surprise me - I would have expected them to not have a problem with 128kbps, because they would have given much more precise descriptions. Maybe HA listeners can hear better.
That's not logical positivism (although I do agree that some of the fanbois do hold that sort of position). A more accurate description would be "only statements which are verifiable have meaning, and much of high end is not verifiable". (With the usual addendum that only things which are ABXable are verifiable.)
Why would you even bring your meaning of logical positivism up in the context of MP3s? There are a million and one good reasons why they should be audibly different.
In the context of this larger discussion.. ignore the whole "nobody can ABX this yet except Arny who possibly got lucky" thing. Assume that somebody CAN ABX these samples. The fact that so many other factors come into play with LP playback means that having a model of how demagnetization works is very important - otherwise how do you know when a successful ABX represents the audibility of demagnetization, or when it represents some other unrelated effect? And I refuse to believe that this model is unknowable, and I've made a good effort to make such a model (as described earlier). And there are many ways that this model either could preclude what is being alleged about the effects of demagnetization, or perhaps, already has. (And I've already made an initial stab at that too.)
IOW, you seem to be asserting a level of unknowability, or ignorance, of the situation, at least among the skeptics, that simply does not exist. Or at least, I bristle at it.
At the same time... demagnetization equipment isn't exactly expensive. IIRC, a bunch of Vinyl Asylum guys found degaussing guns for $50, if that, and if the Furutech unit actually does have an impact, I think a $50 degausser can give results that are at least almost as good (the fact that the gun does not cover the radius of the record in one go perhaps requires some care in the process). I think most of the ado about this is about the price tag rather than the process itself. Nobody on HA cares all that much about those guys who wet-clean their records before every play, but in reality, I think demagnetization is more ado to that than to some larger boogaboo.
On that note, next time you come down to Texas, try a Fireman's #4 (a blonde) if you don't get those up in NYC. I had one last night at the Alamo while watching Star Trek. Good stuff.
"So, then, a finely tuned tweak inventor such as yourself should be better than the rank and file."
That's kind of irrelevant. But *someone* definitely is.
"Perhaps you will be the savior of the hobby from, "66% of the time, I could tell a difference." Are you finally the savant who can do it?"
Definitely not this kid. Physician heal thyself, I always say.
I mean, how else would you be able to decide how many brilliant pebbles to put in a baggie if you can't consistently hear pebble to pebble differences?
Excellent question!
Yes, I'm talking about the 4 files that Fresh Clip posted.
Our favorite amphibian is showing his usual lack of attention when he accuses you of being their source, Ethan.
Okay, where are the files again and what are we supposed to be doing with them?
It gives credence to one side over the other...hiding from the test also lends weight to the other sides argument.
Remember, the issue is that this change in sound is profound, not minuscule. If it cannot be heard is it there? Perhaps for some and not others. That sort of tweak is fine at $100...at $2000 it had sure as heck do something one can hear better than maybe.
Let
GoodGod! If that isn't a Republican response!
INVADE! INVADE! THEY SAY THEY WON'T TEST SO WE KNOW THEY ARE!!!
"Guessed correctly" is a quote from Ethan when he first described his 'test'.
Risk extreme embarrassment or be a good guesser. This is not a test I have any interest in taking. That was my point.
Most people taking part in this thread have never had direct experience with the Furutech device. If you read the original post and Stephen's comments about his experience, I'd say they are more or less in line with your hypothetical example. Unless we want to spend another 40 pages arguing over the word "big" or "immediate".
And I have no interest in arguing over "is it worth it" since this is a purely subjective matter.
Either read May's response or head to eBay for a bulk tape eraser. Cost is not the issue here.
I agree that this thread did not go 40 pages based on the merits of the Furutech deMag.
This thread is going 40+ pages over the validity of the following statement:
The above is not an accurate statement if one allows that the relevant science has some validity. To be a valid statement, it needs to be reworded as follows:
"I perceived a difference between what I thought were 2 different pressings of the same album, from outside Michael's listening room. I was not paying attention as I was setting up my speaker measuring kit; yet I perceived a clear difference in the bass."
Removed was the following totally erroneous claim:
"I had no expectation bias".
The only way to free yourself of expectation bias is to die or at least become unconscious. I'm not totally sure about the latter, but science is very sure about the former.
It is very disrespectful of the experience of hearing to confuse it with a few casual perceptions.
You're still new here. Yep, this would easily run to forty whatever many pages just because someone - all it takes is one - doesn't want it to work.
It is actually quite clear that from the standpoint of many interested parties, the thing that they don't to have want to seem to work is science.
I read that five times, guy and it still doesn't make a lick o'sense. Or, guy sense I read five lick that times still it o'and,.
What about us uninterested parties? BYOB?
Are you a Dan Brown fan Arny? This is sounding an awful lot like a super secret conspiracy. Are you part of the hi-fi Illuminati? Don't worry, I won't tell.
The above is not an accurate statement if one allows that the relevant science has some validity. To be a valid statement, it needs to be reworded as follows:
"I perceived a difference between what I thought were 2 different pressings of the same album, from outside Michael's listening room. I was not paying attention as I was setting up my speaker measuring kit; yet I perceived a clear difference in the bass."
"Removed was the following totally erroneous claim:
"I had no expectation bias".
The only way to free yourself of expectation bias is to die or at least become unconscious. I'm not totally sure about the latter, but science is very sure about the former."
OK, Mr. Smarty Pants, science dude, how could he have had an expectation bias if he was not expecting anything. I.e., he did not know that the Furutech device was being used, or that anything was being done to the system. He couldn't have had an expectation bias with respect to the Furutech device - or anything else for that matter. He was in the next room putting his speaker measuring kit together. Hellooo!
A logical response is more to the point..If we were speaking of a democrat response, it would have been 'danger, danger, run away!'...
Okay Mr. Krueger, what _was_ my expectation bias, given that I had no idea what Michael was demonstrating and wasn't in the room?
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
John,
Don't worry about thing. I've got it all under control. All 45+ pages.
ROTFL!!!
Duuuuude! That's like, duh?! Now you want to argue politics? Geeeez!
This is the dumbest damn dumbass thread I've ever seen!
Not being a mind reader, I have no idea what anybody's biases are for sure.
However, saying that any human is unbiased goes against a ton of science.
As usual John, you're deep into a bogus argument, claiming that I have to know all of the relevant details about the unknowable to know that it at least exists.
Because he was conscious.
Our perceptions are the consequences of sensory information plus our memories. Another word for the application of memories to sensory information is bias.
Here's a little light reading for you:
http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690
Please post again on this topic after you read and understand it. It costs less than $20 shipped, so you have no excuse not to read it.
Okay, Mr. Smarty Pants if it is so inexpensive than buy it and have it shipped to him. Then you will have that over his head all the time.
If that's the case, why didn't JA and SM see the six foot tall bunny? Wrong bias or wrong size?
"Just why are you wanting to return this bias, sir? It appears to have already been opened."
As Ethan says,
Quoting Ethan here, "
"
Is this not both paranoid and a tad egotistic...Is it not possible he simply wanted to see if you could put your ears where your keyboard is...to see if you could prove your contention. If you could Ethan would look pretty silly. As you avoided the challenge, you appear to have the weaker position...
To someone as dumb and naive as Ethan is, I'm sure it does look that way. If you want to bandy about labels like "paranoid" and "egotistic", throw them at your friend Ethan; they're a much better fit for him. And I am not "avoiding" his "vengeance test", I am simply not interested in taking it. I've made that very clear days ago, so don't try to beg, coerce, intimidate or shame me into doing so. Not gonna work. Most of the people he's been either begging or threatening to download his files, have no interest whatsoever in doing so. There's a difference. Ethan has actually -avoided- my challenge for him to take FC's test, by mostly ignoring those who've asked him to. That's the difference. It appears, JIMV, you haven't taken your friend Ethan's test. Why are you asking me to take it, if you haven't? Did Ethan beg you in email to write this post to me, to get me to take his stupid vengeance test? If so, "not gonna work!" (reg. tm.)
I agree that Ethan would look "pretty silly" if I bothered with his challenge. But who cares? You think I do? Think again. Ethan -already- looks silly. With all of his falsehoods, attributing claims to his opponents which they never made, glaring hypocrisy, endless displays of cowardice, and every time he shows his ignorance of science, he humiliates himself on a regular basis around here. In fact, he's been looking like quite the buffoon to a lot of people, all week. So are his friends, and if you continue behaving as his apologist, it'll rub off on you. Ethan looks like a fool for even putting this phony trumped-up "test file challenge" out there, expecting me to swallow his bait, for several reasons...
1) He did so, as I -already mentioned-, with hostile malice and prejudice aforethought. Unless you're a fool, you don't ask someone to take your test under those conditions.
2) Try thinking about what you said. Fire up all the neurons in your grey matter, and I'll help you figure this out, and then maybe you'll finally get it: If I could ID his files, Ethan would look silly. That's the easy part, the part we agree on. Ok, here's the part I need you think harder about: Ethan proved to be a very very angry boy because I made him look silly, (inadvertently), when I mentioned the fact that I could clearly hear what he failed to. Right after, he comes out with this vengeance test. Knowing that if I ID'd his files he'd look silly yet again, he's not going to allow that to happen. Therefore, whatever I say is before or after, Ethan will declare me wrong.
3) Ethan has the weaker position. if you're so obsessed about keeping score. FC put out a file challenge that neither Ethan nor I can cheat at. I had the courage to take that challenge, so did Jan. Ethan however chickened out of it in full coward regalia, as everyone expected him to. Just like he chickened out of the test challenge I made to him last summer, where he also couldn't cheat. His latest weasel words on that test challenge is "his friend Arny declares that the files are identical, so Ethan then declares he won't even download the other two he doesn't have, and take the test". THAT is what I call lame and weak and disingenuous. Ethan has NEVER taken a test challenge that he couldn't control or cheat on. I have. That's why I will always be in a stronger position than him. Score one for the kid.
4) As I also already mentioned JIMV, Ethan screwed with the files. I said I already compared them to the originals, and in no way do they resemble the quality of the originals. Knowing how many times Ethan has proven to be dishonest since I've known him, I believe he probably did this on purpose to trip me up. And I don't care to get into an argument over what exactly Ethan did to the files or to hear more false theories about his files. It won't change what I heard, and what I heard is good enough reason for NO ONE to test his bogus files.
Remember, the issue is that this change in sound is profound, not minuscule.
NOT with Ethan's files it isn't, which is what you're referring to. So don't speak on this issue, until you've compared his files to the originals, and you have the listening ability to make that a worthwhile effort. You're doing the same thing here Ethan always does; misapplying rhetoric to pursue an agenda. Sounds like you two are closer than I thought.
5) Ethan said he refuses to divulge the results of his challenge if I don't take the test. So not only is his vengeance test a waste of time for me, but a waste of time for anyone else. Now, enough said about his joke test!
I do not have a dog in this fight. I began figuring there was some unknown effect from the absurdly expensive toy that did make a difference.
It's not a "toy". That's insulting for a product you have no experience in. And just because you can't afford it, doesn't mean it's "absurdly expensive".
I still believe the same but my system is not nearly good enough to tell such a difference (despite all the 'night and day' hyperbole)and my background is not such that I can see through pseudo scientific BS of A/B comparison problems.
There's nothing wrong with your system. I was able to discern the effect without trouble, in digitized file samples that MF provided, on cheap computer speakers.
continued argument is moot.
Right, then you who have "no dog in this fight" as you say, and who says continued argument is moot, then don't continue this argument and stay out of our discussion.
Pages