| 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
Oh, believe me, I'm right there with you, Brother David. We put up with Ethan's infantile antics because he's better and cheaper entertainment than a suitcase full of monkeys. Which, I believe is where you came from, if I'm not mistaken? Plus, he plays a mean cello, don't you know.
And it is just as difficult to get facts from Ethan, as has already been demonstrated already. If you have a problem why don't you get Ethan to answer innocent or guilty instead of stonewalling and sidestepping. If he is innocent he should have no problem stating such.
Also interesting that you have condoned Ethan's accusations of fraud, outright lying etc before Ted ever presented any data. In fact no data has yet arrived. So how would you know unless you had a vested interest in Ted's failure and Ethan's hype.
You do realize it was against forum rules for Ethan, as a direct competitor, to ever attack Ted don't you. Why are you not harping about that. Now you are harping on us because Ethan blantly stonewalls stating whether he is innocent or guilty of defrauding the public.
I suggest you go back to August 2008 concerning the room graph scam Ethan pulled on the public here, and check AVS where Ethan offered advice that if followed would sabatoge viewers rooms by grossly exaggerating the bass, thus the need for room treatments, even more.
Ethan must have gotten some chuckles duping viewers to sabotage their own rooms.
As long as Ethan continues to evade, dodge, stonewall the question, are you innocent or guilty, I doubt I will post the answer. It depends on if and when Ethan comes clean to the public with an innocent or guilty plea.
How could Ethan have shown Ted to be wrong when no 3rd party evidence has ever been presented yet. We only have a competitors word, as posted many times, which is quite questionable to say the least. And JA and I have already corrected Ethan and J_J for their failure to even identify the problem. All Ethan ever stated was the decays were different, which would indicate Ted's products were working. Your logic defies description.
Take care.
By pointing out the data was physically impossible. duh
Prove it Scott. Where is your proof. So far all you have posted is hot air and inaccurate opinions.
Yes, but the key difference is I was right, and proved it, ultimately forcing Ted to admit his "error." Versus Frog and SAS who continue to throw stones without one shred of evidence. Can you really not see the difference?
Sorry, no. I only see more lying and hypocrisy coming from you, Ethan. The hypocrisy of saying that both I and SAS "throw stones without one shred of evidence", when it is YOU that has done this against Ted. Can you really not see the difference, Winer? How about the hypocrisy of whining about people who "express themselves very strongly in such a foul manner", while you write to Ted "I call bullshit. That data is clearly fabricated. Made up. Fraudulent. Outright lies. Rigged. Photoshopped."? Is that not plain as the nose on your face? Because it is to everyone else, including your own allies!
Now for the lying. This time, your lying comes from you declaring that you "proved" Ted's data was falsified, as you had claimed. You did no such thing. If you had done so, you would have proven it by now. But instead, you continue to throw stones without one shred of evidence.
Sound familiar?
In the last two days I have asked SAS at least three times to either prove his claims or shut up. But he keeps accusing me and of course has no proof.
Two days?? Is that it?! In the last TWO YEARS, I have asked YOU to prove your claims about me or *shut up*. But you still keep accusing me and of course, you have no proof. (How can you, you're an incorrigible liar?)
Sound familiar?
In the bigger picture, the ferociousness of my initial attack on Ted was calculated and deliberate.
I wanted to show how absolutely certain I was that Ted's data was fraudulent.
Well you didn't, and even if all your bloated BS had a grain of truth to it, that is extremely unethical of you to do, not to mention against our regulations. But all you did was SAY it was fraudulent, in a lot of vigorous assertions with a lot of appeals to authority. Not one stinking shred of evidence did you ever show, and you "purposely chose words" that were vague about what it is that you objected to with Ted's data in the first place. That way you would not have to explain yourself.
I purposely chose words that could be used in a court of law against me, knowing that this would force the issue quickly. And of course I was right.
Of course, you weren't right, and your face-saving lies here are not fooling me, Mister. Either show us already where you pointed out one of the graphs started -500ms early, or shut up. As JA and SAS showed by pointing out amplitude to you, you didn't even know how to read those graphs.
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
Unless of course you're posting under sockpuppet names so you can defame audio companies like Ted's even more viciously and more anonymously; ie. "JohnnyR", "Fiji5555", etc. Even if I only knew you from the last two weeks, I would still say that truly, you are one of the most deplorable net trolls I have ever come across. And trust me, that's saying something.
Scott,
This is audio. Reality is irrelevant, you see, what really matters is that the scientists are all doused in kerosene and set on fire, and that the marketeers control the nation, a whole lot like the last 8 years.
FUD man, it's all Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.
That's what the likes of the tadpole would like to spread, you see, fear of being right, uncertainty if physics works, and doubt about reality.
I think you've hit it with your suggestion that s/he seek help.
...And after they shared a few more drinks, and Scotty got just comfortable enough to rest his head on daddy James' lap, James blurted this out, in a kind of incoherent, slurred way (but that's the way he normally speaks, so not an effect from the alcohol):
Wrong. The tadpole and its allies have FOUR weapons. Fear (correct), and surprise. So you see... no, wait, that's TWO weapons. Sorry. "Amongst our weapons, are such diverse elements as fear and surprise and ruthless effficiency!" So you see, you are no match for me, piddling little trifle-- pardon? Three weapons? Sorry. Ok, like I was saying, we have FOUR weapons. Amongst our weaponry are such elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, and an almost fanatical devotion to Ivor Tiefenbrun. So you see, you and your little burro are no match for me and my coalition of High End Amphibian Warriors. I promise you James, we the coalition WILL not stop until EVERY scientist has been burned at the stake for the witches that they are. Don't worry, physicians will be given a free admission to the abusement park. Where their first "ride", will be "The Rack". Guaranteed to make you 6" taller, or your money back, ha! I don't think you want to know what I have in store for Floyd Toole and Sean Olive. Besides, this is a family forum, so we have to keep it clean.
Don't be so sure about reality, James. Because this could all just be part of someone's dream, and maybe nothing of this really exists. Except of course the POWER OF UNI-DIRECTIONAL HIGH END AUDIO GIZMOS. Even your precious "science" can't be relied on, because "science" can't even explain what was there before the universe, ha! How's it going to reliably explain anything that came after?? So you think I need "help" do you? Well you're absolutely RIGHT about that. I need help in killing every damn scientist on the face of this planet. (So what are you two sweethearts doing on the weekend? I'm just askin', cos we could use a couple more hands. Some of the scientists can be a bit hard to contain, when they're running away in flames).
Michigan,
Actually there is more, all we just read from Scott and J_J were prepared statements and no scientific proof from either. Same M.O. as Ethan. Not surprising since all are "in bed together".
And J_Js statement is no more revealing, just a prepared vague, generic statement, the same M.O. as Ethan's posts. The fact is that JA and I both had to correct Ethan's and J_J's completely erroneous and non scientific comparisons of the given graphs. They lucked out because their erroneous conclusions led them to believe. Of course they may have called it fake regardless, like they have before the graphs were ever posted. Neither understood, let alone posted, the real reasons why the given graphs were false. As one can see Ethan and J_J may claim to be scientific, but........
Interesting Scott and J_J both support Ethan Winer (as you have seen in this string) who has a history of setting people up to mess up their own listening rooms and need room treatments even more. (That is real scientific honesty isn't it.) So what else can you expect from Scott and J_J in their posts? Remember, if they think alike, post alike, support each other, and one of them is a con, what do you think the others are doing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_trick
And article #14 from Martin DeWulf.
http://www.boundforsound.com/reviews.htm#Truth
Read the rest of the article for more info.
Note that Steve Sammet, incompetent vendor of overpriced audiophoolery, still has not backed up his claims! Amazingly, he turns it around on me, saying it's my fault for not denying enough times that I'm a fraud.
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
You are only making yourself look worse attacking another manufacturer.
Quote when you posted you were innocent or you were not guilty of fraud. NONE unless you edited your post within the last three days. You only demanded I show proof, not that you were innocent. Again you are only demonstrating you cannot be trusted, are not honest to the public.
(By the way you mislead the public by hiding the fact that I clearly stated I have been giving you chance after chance to come clean.)
So let's get it one more time. Have you provided false information on AVS, that if followed would have viewers sabotaging their rooms acoustics so room treatments would be more necessary. If you are innocent you should have no problems replying innocent.
Got to take off now.
Prepared statements?
get help. Honestly, get help.
Was there supposed to be a question mark there? Regardless, the answer is No. Duh. Now go prove otherwise.
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
Ethan, please do not piss all over our rules. There are already very few formal rules in place, so it shouldn't be hard to respect what is there. This is the second industry member of this forum that you have cast asperions in a week's time. Moreover, you accused one industry member, Ted. D., of both fraud and falsification of test data. Yet it is YOU that has still not backed up your claims of those very serious charges, so YOU are the one guilty of "fraudulence" here.
You may not care about the fact that potentional customers are or will be reading your messages here, and realize that you are an interminable liar who can never be trusted to tell the truth, that you have been caught using sockpuppet shills on forums to damage the reputation of your competitors, and that you have serious moral integrity if not mental issues (ie. persecution complex). If you wish to destroy your own business, that is your choice.
But as an industry member on a public forum like Stereophile, not only do you have a certain responsibilities, you have certain standards of ethical behaviour you are expected to adopt. If you can not refrain from falsely accusing other industry members of fraudulence, I suggest you find another forum with which to pitch your wares. Bring your sockpuppets with you too, as they don't help us around here.
LOL, said the pot to the kettle.
[RealTraps Dude]
As we can see, zero evidence of whatever ridiculous claim you're supposed to be making now. Quelle surprise. I don't recall you ever supporting a single claim you have made in 1,538 posts here. That of course doesn't include the thousands of posts filled with unsupported claims on other forums you troll.
Hell, you have still not supported your claims of fraud against Ted Denney with evidence, and now you've also made new claims against the products of Steve Sammet, which you have also failed to prove.
As Steve said in so many words, all these false accusations you are making against people only serve to make you look like an unscruplous SOB, and your company, RealTraps, look more like it should be called "RealNuts" (a reference to what you would have to be, if you buy anything from a company headed by a lying raving lunatic like yourself).
I suggest, once again, that you get help for your delusions, and do so quickly. You are clearly unwell, and your threats are not well-taken, even though they appear entirely unrealistic.
I've got an idea. This whole axe-to-grind-with-Ethan thing is not appropriate for this thread. This thread is about ART products. Ethan does not need an Amen corner , nor does Ted Denney. The whole frog/sammet/ethan gangbang is a bit tiresome.
If frog or sammet work for ART, that is one thing..but I really don't see how personal gripes have anything to do with the subject at hand. If one wants to start a thread about ethan's alleged transgressions...feel free. but THIS isn't the place for it.
its always the same people in every pissing match.
this ego battle is distorting the issue at hand...ie Ted's data flub and the potential to see real, valid data demonstrating that the things work... I hope he posts new data as soon as he can. I really don't see the issue with posting a REW file to someone , a 3rd party with no ties to either the fringe crowd or the science crowd.
Ok, FINE, James. If it will make you shut up about this already, -you- find the psychiatrist who is willing to take me on, and I'll go, okay? Keep in mind, he can not belong to the APA, the WPA, the AMA, the CPA, the... well, pretty much every medical and psychological organization in NA, and a good part of the rest of the world. My name is blacklisted among all of them, and they will not permit their mental health professionals to come within 10 miles of me. The last fellow I saw now requires psychiatric help himself, after agreeing to take me on. Poor fellow, he keeps seeing me in his dreams and waking up in a pool of sweat.
Well I guess that's something you both have in common, isn't it.
So, discuss what you want to discuss. What's stopping you exactly? And if there are posts you don't like, scroll past them. No one's expecting you to love everything you read. That's what the scroll bars on your right are for. You did however raise an interesting question in my mind. Which is, what the hell IS the subject of this thread anyway? I never actually looked at that, so I just did. And what do I find? This, it turns out, is merely another attack thread, started by another Ethan apologist named AlexO. It is in fact the 2nd part of the 1st attack thread against Synergistics, that Ethan populated. AlexO didn't really have ANYTHING to say here, or to discuss, since he asked no question. He started out pretending to be neutral, and then proceed to his real motive, when he took a nice dump on Synergistics. Some of it looks like this:
His anti-Synergistics bias is as obvious as his devotion to Ethan. Then who comes along right after that? "David L.", the Ethan Winer sockpuppet who was created for the S-ART thread, which we are supposed to pretend is an "innocent member". When Ethan Winer is adding plants all over the place and the conversations are being dominated by devotees and fanboys of Winer, well I'm sorry you can choose to ignore that but I won't. These people are shills here, on behalf of Winer. There is no point in pretending you can have a productive discussion with someone who's position is being driven by a deliberate agenda; an anti-audiophile one at that. Just as there is no proof you can offer Ethan to where you would ever hear him say "Oh Christ, what a complete ass I've made of myself! Why didn't somebody tell me what an idiot I've been?! I am so sorry Mr. Denney for accusing you of fraud, and all the other nasty things I have said! Please, please accept my humblest apologies! I can see now your devices are totally legitimate!".
How is that even an "issue" to discuss? There's nothing to discuss about that, the issue came and went. Ted posted a preliminary measurement, with more to follow. He later noticed one glitch on the graph, and withdrew the data for later correction. Big whoop. Yet Ethan apologists are running around this forum screaming and acting like he murdered somebody, and is trying to hide the body under the stairs.
As for the REW file, Ted already offered to post his to JA; did you miss that? But who says he has to? Who cares what a small band of antisocial geeks on a small audio forum -demand-? It isn't even worth Ted's time to post the data results here, let alone dick around with geeky demands by the cave dwellers here to "prove" they're legit by posting the original REW files. Oh lord, in 24hrs no less!! What a farce this is! Do you actually think any of the Ethan Apologist Brigade are dying to see these data results because if convincing, they will buy the S-ARTs? These dorks wouldn't care about the S-ART devices if Stephen Hawking came and gave a scientific explanation on their form and function.
Anyone who is serious about getting acoustic room treatment products like doesn't need any stupid "REW files" or "waterfall graphs". Serious people, as opposed to the forum kiddies here, know that data graphs don't mean squat when evaluating such a product. They will NOT tell you what the bloody things sound like, and may not even accurately reflect your experience with them. Particularly if you don't have a 15,000 sq. foot room. All of S-ART's customers, and there have been many, bought them without requiring data measurements, and are reportedly very satisfied with the purchases. So unless you're a stone-deaf goofball like Ethan, to which the question of their efficacy is moot, all you need is a decent pair of ears to understand what these devices can or can't do. If the concept, marketing, testimonials and reviews aren't enough to convince you to take a FREE demonstration, then you have serious issues brother, that no little bowls are going to fix.
And let me remind you, the "ego battle" you refer to, was started by Ethan Winer. As most ego battles of the past were.
Oh, I do..and I will. The issue isn't my convenience, though..the issue *is* that these pissing matches take away from any meaningful discussion.
im not siding with those guys either.. look, you have to know that no amount of bluster and/or sermonizing/slander/libel/threats/insults is going to persuade either side.. the folks who are in the "science" camp will remain there, as will those who dwell in the fringes.. it is important that Ted post some meaningful data.
I think that Ethan knows comments like this are wrong...at the core of it though, he means well. He just gets riled up like the rest of us do, and as a result, says silly things.
Frog , surely you know that you can't throw around accusations like that without any proof! You were just berating Ethan for the same thing!
you'd be surprised, that is, if you were willing to try.
Would you admit the same? Because really, your posts are no different.
why would he say that? there has been no proof that they are *legitimate* at all... we are all waiting for proof. I hope Ted follows through.
it is in Ted's best interests to post the REW files. no, he doesn't *have* to..but hell, he doesn't *have* to sell anything, either. the burden of proof is on Ted/SR. If I were him, I would want to do anything I could to make sure that my products were taken seriously..
and Frog.. all that aside..I am curious. What is the reason that you don't ever post using your real name? Is it for security reasons? Privacy? I notice that you don't put your name or address on things that you mail, either. What is the reason for that? You have to know that you won't really be taken seriously as long as you continue to use that "frog" handle. We are all adults here, and as such, we should be prepared to stand behind what we say, take responsibility.
with this whole anonymous thing, there is no accountability, no integrity.
I hope that JA will make the *real* names rule mandatory in the near future.
-T. Ray
Frankly we don't trust you. If one looks back, this is the first time Ethan has indicated he is not guilty. So he has a habitual problem being truthful to anyone.
Again, you can't trusted.
NCdrawal is angry because Ethan's credibility is being buried six feet under in the public's eyes. Interesting that NCdrawal calls it a "pissing match" when NC etc gets caught in a scam and/or the science doesn't go their way.
Remember it is not about them, it is about the public knowing they are being scammed by these guys.
I have already quoted Ethan's two posts claiming he is not guilty of providing false information to the public on AVS. I quoted so Ethan's posts don't suddenly change or disappear.
Here is the link to the AVS string concerning an analog RS meters low frequency accuracy.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1063837
And the false information Ethan posted that will cause customers to sabotage their audio systems.
Here are some correction tables from others regarding the old analog meter.
AudioXpress.
RS meter reading is down X db. Actually need to add numbers.
Frequency Unit A Unit B
20hz -4.2db -4.8db
31.5 -1.1 -1.6
40 -1.1 -1.0
Blue-ray forum: http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=38765&highlight=radio+shack
Meter reads low and X db needs to be added to reading.
20.0 hz: + 7.5 db added to meter reading
25.0 hz: + 5.0 db
31.5 hz: + 3.0 db
40.0 hz: + 2.5 db
50.0 hz: + 1.5 db
63.0 hz: + 1.5 db
80.0 hz: + 1.5 db
100.0 hz: +2.0 db
125.0 hz: +0.5 db
By the way, I can't find one forum or anyone else who uses Ethan's graph for RS mic correction.
I contacted Neumann Mics and received this reply on July 28, 2008. This is what they stated concerning Ethan's measurement technique.
"Regarding the realtraps.com they
describe a quick&dirty, *relative* measurement technique, which has nothing to do with standardized measurements; but it might give a first approximation of the behaviour of the measured mics. By the way, measurement mics come in 3 tastes: diffuse-field equalized, pressure-field
equalized and free-field equalized. The Bruel&Kjaer website gives you a few hundred pages of info to read on this topic."
With best regards
Georg Neumann GmbH, Berlin
Microphone Development
So Ethan's mic graph, both highs and lows, are certainly not accurate according to Neumann Mics.
So what did Ethan state on AVS.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1063837
Here is Ethan's graph.
The black line is the RS analog mic on axis, directed at the source. Notice Ethan has the analog RS mic's response the same as the reference mics in the lower regions. But Ethan's measuring technique is "dirty" according to Neumann Mics.
Unfortunately this graph is not accurate according to any of the real experts one sees at various websites I have seen.
So how does a meter that reads low impact a system. When one setups his system, one naturally wants a flat response from bass through treble. In otherwards the bass SPL to be the same as the mids and highs SPL, a natural, flat overall response.
We know many if not almost all forums, except Ethan, post that the RS meter is somewhere between 4.2 and mostly 7.5db down. When one sets up his audio system so that the RS meter reads "flat" in the bass he will actually be 4.2 to 7.5db too high in the bass (10db is double the perceived loudness). If someone has a radio with separate bass and treble controls and the bass control is turned up, the bass becomes too heavy and it sounds fatter.
By following Ethan's advice, Mr. Public, you, unknowingly made your system sound worse than before by actually raising the bass response too high. The need for room treatments becomes even greater. So Ethan creates his own market on unsuspecting you, the public.
That is all for now.
Right. I am sure that RealTraps stock fell through the floor after your little expose. Jesus. Steve, are you really so naive? Do you know how many folks purchase realtraps(and other "accepted" treatment products)? If you know that, surely you are also aware of the fact that your coverage of Ethans "scandal" has done nothing to damage the reputation of Mr. Winer nor has or will it ever affect sales. If anything, it has assured Ethan and his buddies a laugh as they read this thread and mock it. Don't you know that?
Ethan has been around for ages. His reputation is rock-solid, and he is well-respected in the pro-audio community.
Ted is the new guy on the block here.. that being said, SR ART has never been nor will they ever be a competitor for RealTraps. If they *do* work, Ethan will admit it and retract his statements, issue an apology, etc.
I am not angry at all
.. I don't even own any realtraps products(yet)!! ... my room and studio was outfitted by GIK(Ethan's number one competitor), yet I still ask Ethan for advice, and he gives it freely, no hard feelings.
PS
Steve, please learn how to use HTML tags. It is not necessary to quote an entire post. You do that often, and it is annoying.
SAS, "quick and dirty" means "not as refined as a more involved prodecure," but that doen't mean that the manufacturer agreed with your premise at all.
Did you notice the manufacturer said nothing about the integrity of the graphs?
No 500ms errors?
You and the good Michigan have done stellar work at taking people's minds off the Synergistic ART topic, and are to be comended for your dissimulation of the original Ted fiasco.
Making this a thread about the messenger rather than the message was well thought - Dick Cheney would be proud.
Where, though, is you interest in Ted's data?
You took the time to evaluate and even print and compare, but we get none of the in depth coverage you provide for Ethan!
"but it might give a first approximation of the behaviour of the measured mics".
Read above Buddha. His comment was in regards to Ethan's 10 mic graph. It is not reliable. Doesn't the public deserve to know, as you pointed out with Ted.
And you have done the same off of Ethan. Nice job. You also did a stellar job at lynch mobbing Ted, but Ethan gets a bye. However, the science demonstrates otherwise.
Second, Ethan was viciously attacking Ted long before Ted's graphs were posted. Have you chided Ethan for that, or for breaking the forum rules?
Thirdly, as stated many times before, I am waiting for 3rd party data to come in, not be part of the lynching.
Don't you think the credibility of the accuser is important due to Ethan's vicious assault on Ted long before any data was entered? You guys always seem to dodge that question.
A competitor's motive, credibility is always important as JA has pointed out. We both know we make mistakes. Should not Ted be given the benefit of the doubt, at least until 3rd party evidence shows up.
Stated above, waiting for 3rd party evidence. Something wrong with that? I thought that was the American way.
Ah, you just got it in my last post. You wanted science, didn't you, and you got it.
The point is you guys are quick to attack Ted, but even though Ethan has been caught lying over and over and over, and now caught as a charlatan here, you don't care. So why should you care about Ted, seems hypocritical. I think we should follow the American way, not lynch mob tatics. Don't you?
Actually, my first response to Ted's data was to invoke your expertise.
My first response to Ted's data was, and I quote (go look at his triumphant "Proof Positive" thread):
"SAS Audio has paid a great deal of attention to Ethan's procedures, it'll be interesting to see what his take is on Ted's.
Can't wait for Ethan to explain the data, too!"
__________________
That is not quite a public lynching of Ted. I was interested in seeing what the two people who seem able to discuss measurement would say.
Then, Ethan let the lightning bolts fly and Ted's data was discredited. Which, of course, was taken as proof by some of Ethan's dark intentions.
SAS, you remain steadfastly dedicated to finding flaws in any of Ethan's work (which is fine,) yet regarding Ted, you offer this: "...waiting for 3rd party evidence. Something wrong with that? I thought that was the American way."
On Ethan's behalf, however, you do not bother to wait for such third party involvement. Instead, you roll up your sleeves and have at him (which is fine,) but there is an obvious prejudice visible in your handling of Ethan vs. Ted's "data."
You presonal bias is glaring, which does harm to your message, as well. You say, "You guys blah blah blah poor Ted," but you apply an obvious double standard in your data analysis between Ted and Ethan, mon frere.
I know a victory for Ethan is a terrible thing for the Ethanhater Club to handle, but he popped you guys square in the kisser with this data stuff.
Best to regroup and wait for your next opportunity. You're making Ethan appear to be more sympathetic the more you rail at his success on this issue.
Wow, so that is Steve's proof that I'm a fraud who tricks potential customers into over-buying my company's products? You'll also notice that whatever contention exists in that AVS thread was perpetrated by Steve Sammet as he tried continually to discredit me and my data.
There was another thread at AVS where Steve was in full attack mode. By the end of the thread all the regulars had shouted him down and told him to take a hike. I tried to find it but didn't see it after a quick scan there, so it might be old and since moved to the archives. Whatever.
Anyway, nice "proof" Steve!
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
My apologies Buddha. Thanks for reminding me.
__________________
I asked before, but no response from you. Would you quote Ethan's comments "catching" stating Ted's data is crap. We want to see proof that Ethan actually knew Ted's data was false.
Good question Buddha. Because I do not have all the facts and theories of Ted's products. You have to admit they are different. Ethan's graphs and comments are a completely different story, long time, clear science involved.
As explained above, Ethan's graphs etc are very common science so can easily be addressed. Ted's products are unusual though. The public wants to see the scientific evidence Buddha.
As seen above, clearly no double standard. After reading above, one can see I use science, experts, and facts. If Ethan did not "break" science, I could not have posted.
The public wants to know if they are being duped, by either Ted or Ethan. We don't know in Ted's case yet, the data is not in; but we do know in Ethan's case because the science is so clear.
If I would have called Ted a fraud, would I have gotten credit Buddha? JA does not necessarily believe they work (he wants data), so does he get some credit?
And do I get credit for popping Ethan in the kisser because I actually used clearly understood science and experts? I mean look at the science I posted in my last post concerning Ethan's graph and how if followed sabotages ones's own audio system. The public can glean and be happy from the science I presented to them.
Let's see. Ethan states on AVS forum that no corrections are needed with the RS meter.
I post there is a problem with Ethan's comment and graph, and list three reliable, generally accepted correction tables.
Ethan then post this ridiculous comment.
Sivadselim also questions Ethan's remarks.
So Sivadselim sees Ethan's problem.
I post and concur that there is a problem with Ethan's comment and graph.
Sivadselim comments again addressing me.
Ethan Winer finally replies and admits:
How many of the public want to guess if Ethan would have posted an admission if I had not been there. Of course by sabotaging one's own audio system one needs room treatments even more.
Now I suppose Ethan is going to claim it was a just a mistake.
Seems he has accused me several times, but never a link or proof, just another attack on someone who used science to tell the truth and help the public. Surprise surprise.
So Ethan Winer, owner of Realtraps, admitted posting a false comment which misleads viewers to sabotage their own systems if followed. But would he have made the admission if I wasn't there. Remember, these guys claim to attack snake oil salemen. Now we find they are the snake oil salesmen.
Good thing I look out for the public or they would get ripped off even worse.
****So, discuss what you want to discuss. And if there are posts you don't like, scroll past them.
Oh, I do..and I will. The issue isn't my convenience, though..the issue *is* that these pissing matches take away from any meaningful discussion.
Sorry, I don't see how. If I want to post whatever I think is meaningful, I'm not prevented from doing that because some people want to post off topic. I know, I've done this many times on forums. EVERY thread here has off topic posts. Even if I die tomorrow, that's not going to stop. So what's the solution, don't post? Remember again, the S-ART threads Ethan and AlexO started, started OFF as pissing matches; attacks against Synergistic. So you shouldn't be surprised this continues throughout the length of the thread. If a thread is ONLY character attacks, then of course it makes it impossible to have a meaningful discussion. But then who are you planning to have meaningful discourse with, if everyone chooses to post character attacks?
If you really want to know, the reason there are so many pissing matches here, is because there are a lot of ideological "hawks", that have invaded our forum, with the sole purpose of starting pissing matches. I'm not sure where you stand in this, but you should understand this much: You might be part of a discussion forum for atheists, who's purpose is to get a group of like minded individuals to discuss their shared beliefs in atheism, ie. the role that atheism plays in our social culture today. Amongst them, you will still get differences of opinion, and meaningful debates from that. But because they all share the same core beliefs, those opinions will of course be confined to the structure they belong in. These people have not gathered together under a common foundation because they are uncertain whether they are atheists or not. They just want to be who they are and left the fuck alone from outside agenda-pushers, who are opposed to their beliefs. This is no different on objectivist audio cult forums like Hydrogen Audio, where if you try to push your subjectivist beliefs and convert them to that, you will shortly find yourself on a bus going on a one-way trip to Bannedville. No stops ahead on the way. Expect a lot of abuse before you get booted, though.
But okay, in the name of so-called "free speech", the mods on "the atheist forum", decide they're going to get all hip and groovy and allow any pack of insolent nitwits, who's beliefs are diametrically opposed to the core beliefs the forum was founded upon, to come in and trash up the place. With the sole intent of preachng their religious beliefs to a forum of atheists, who are already very happy thankyouverymuch, with their own. Why, because as Geoff pointed out from the words of AlexO (on another audiophle forum he invaded), they consider themselves crusaders out to save our poor fucking misguided audiophile souls. Or worse, if we are considered lost cases, then to prevent any new souls from "going to the dark side" and possibly risking having a halfway decent f*ing sounding system in their living room.
My point in all of this is to say; if the forum and its membership allow members who are hostile to our beliefs to come in with an agenda and do battle with us, then you have to both expect the pissing matches, and allow for them. Otherwise, the ideological hawks will not stop coming in by the busload, with the intention of taking over the forum and destroy the very foundation it was built upon. Then, you might as well call the place "Pseudophile". Hell, they might just change the name themselves following a poll vote. If you think I'm being overly paranoid or protectionist here, well then you haven't seen what I have in my experiences on audio groups. So each time that Ethan brings in a new wave of sockpuppet drones devoted to pushing the Ethan Winer agenda, expect to do a lot of scrolling, brother. Just to make my stance clear on this, Ethan Winer himself is not a Stereophiler. He is and has always been a hostile intruder on this forum. A pseudo-objective dogmatist, who is only here to convert the "audiophools" as he calls us, or sell his audio fridge doors, because SP has a room treatment forum. That is why he is the source of many hostilities here. That is why we rag on him so much, and why you're getting sick of that. So your concerns are valid, but IMO, misdirected at the wrong parties.
****started by another Ethan apologist named AlexO
im not siding with those guys either.. look, you have to know that no amount of bluster and/or sermonizing/slander/libel/threats/insults is going to persuade either side.. the folks who are in the "science" camp will remain there, as will those who dwell in the fringes.. it is important that Ted post some meaningful data.
I know more than that; -nothing- will persuade the ideologues (fence sitters might be). If there has never been any acceptable "data" for these pathological skeptics that would show that amps, cd players, cables, wires and power cords can all have a marked impact on your sound, then it isn't Ted's waterfall graphs that are going to persuade people like Ethan Liar to do an about face and apologize for accusations of fraud and other defamatory remarks. If he ever does do that, I'll change my name to "Ethan Winer Jr.", okay?
***At best, this shows that Synergistic Research is run by amateurs with products that are hit or miss.
I think that Ethan knows comments like this are wrong...at the core of it though, he means well. He just gets riled up like the rest of us do, and as a result, says silly things.
Except that wasn't written by Ethan. It was written by AlexO. Don't worry, I can fully understand why you would get the two confused! And I don't know what on earth would prompt you to say that "Ethan means well" in his malicious, lowlife attacks of false and defamatory accusations against Synergistics. Good God! We're talking about a direct competitor of his! We're talking about someone who went on AudioJunkies, posted as a shill under 3 different handles, and spent weeks saying all manner of foul things against Ted Denney; while promoting his own site so that people would consider his products over Ted's. You call that "means well"?? Shit, I would hate to see what Ethan does when he doesn't mean well.
And I'm sorry, but you are WAYYYY off the mark here buddy, to call Ethan's still as yet unsubtantiated charges of fraud and falisification against Synergistics "silly things". These accusations he has been making against another manufacturer are -very fucking serious-. Not only is it actionable in court against Ethan, but when this kind of Ethan's shit hits the fan, it could very well end up on Stereophile itself, forcing them to pay lawyer's fees just to protect themselves in court. Particularly since it can be clearly shown that they have bent their own policy to allow the unproven defamatory accusations to be made, taking no steps to remove them. Look, I'm not pretending to be an attorney specializing in defamation law, but I think I know enough to NOT call it "silly things".
****Then who comes along right after that? "David L.", the Ethan Winer sockpuppet
Frog , surely you know that you can't throw around accusations like that without any proof! You were just berating Ethan for the same thing!
Nice try NC, but it's not the same thing. I did NOT accuse "David L." of fraud, and could not, as this is an anonymous troll. I simply accused him of having an agenda. And I am NOT doing the same thing as Ethan, because I provided much evidence to show that David L. was an Ethan sockpuppet or associate; in an expose I wrote about this. Whist Ethan did not provide ANY evidence to substantiate his charges of fraud and falsification. Nor am I calling my case against the David L. sockpuppet proof positive, since that is not possible in such a circumstance. I think you're being frivolous in your criticism here, which means that the evidence I did show about the "David L." troll is credible. I fully expect that those who are bent towards Ethan's belief system will choose not to believe that evidence. Like what else is new.
****There is no point in pretending you can have a productive discussion with someone who's position is being driven by a deliberate agenda
you'd be surprised, that is, if you were willing to try.
LOL!!
You don't know me very well, do you? I've already "tried" that since before there was a Stereophile forum. I must have been familiar with Ethan and his agenda over ten years ago. He must not have made much of an impression upon me, because I didn't even remember his name when I came here.
Would you admit the same? Because really, your posts are no different.
I am always ready and willing to see -evidence- of such. Be my guest!
****I can see now your devices are totally legitimate!
why would he say that? there has been no proof that they are *legitimate* at all... we are all waiting for proof. I hope Ted follows through.
You misunderstood my point. That whole spiel was to point out that Ethan would never admit they were, no matter what evidence Ted provides.
it is in Ted's best interests to post the REW files. no, he doesn't *have* to..but hell, he doesn't *have* to sell anything, either. the burden of proof is on Ted/SR. If I were him, I would want to do anything I could to make sure that my products were taken seriously..
Like I said, I really don't think the Stereophile forums are Ted's market, or anyone's, really (other than Ethan Liar, chief owner and liar of RealTraps, LLC). And like you said, this is all just a giant pissing contest. And like I said, those who understand what audio is about and are serious about Ted's products, do NOT need a technophile security blanket. It is an audio product. They only need to listen to it. They will have to anyway, won't they. But from what I've seen so far, I don't see that there is a single person here who is serious and ready to buy the S-ART products, but won't even bother to undergo a free demonstration, unless he has enough satisfying data to convince him to take the demo. Please don't assume the company stands or falls based on what a bunch of twittering goofs on this forum conclude about it's waterfall graphs. Real audiophiles do not walk into a store demanding to see "convincing waterfall graphs" before they will listen to the components in the dealer's listening room. If I had a store and they tried pulling that shit in mine, I would kick them out so hard, they would land up in the Starbucks parking lot, three streets down.
and Frog.. all that aside..I am curious. What is the reason that you don't ever post using your real name? Is it for security reasons? Privacy? I notice that you don't put your name or address on things that you mail, either. What is the reason for that? You have to know that you won't really be taken seriously as long as you continue to use that "frog" handle. We are all adults here, and as such, we should be prepared to stand behind what we say, take responsibility. with this whole anonymous thing, there is no accountability, no integrity.
Well that's really funny!
Yes, I agree, that is a very good example of irony! I mean given that "ncdrawl" is not your name (more like your accent, I take it), and you don't ever post using your real name, you're saying you have no accountability or integrity, and that nothing you say should be taken seriously. As well, that eveyrone here that uses a handle as you do, is not an adult and does not stand behind or take responsibility for what they say. First, do you have ANY idea how many of our esteemed members you are insulting here? I mean besides yourself and "James D. Johnston"? Second, that is a very odd and contradictory set of beliefs you have about names and identities. Are you -sure- you don't want to revise all of this?! 
I hope that JA will make the *real* names rule mandatory in the near future.
What you mean like "Ethan Winer", the guy who insists he's posting under a real name? (pffft! fake name if I've ever seen one!). Why that's just a brilliant idea, NC. Even though everyone I've seen suggesting it was not posting under their real name, but never mind that little inconsistency. It's still a brilliant idea. But wait a second... if Ethan Winer is allegedly posting under his so-called "real name", then why is he this forum's biggest weasel with absolutely zero integrity? Why is he the one who has actually -proven- that he will not take responsibility for what he says by refusing to sign his name and affiliation in his posts as everyone else did, until he finally got threatened with banishment enough times to force him to consider doing so for a little while longer? Why is he the one who has actually -proven- he will not be held accountable for the most heinous defamation ever seen in the history of this forum? Why is he the one who has made the most outrageous claims, and the most unsupported, unsubstantiated, unproven claims. Why is he --contstantly-- making highly irresponsible hit and run accusations against people that he refuses to answer for? Why does he act the least like an adult, and gets to violate our rules every which way but loose?
So tell me, where do you GET this ridiculous idea that the name you post under has anything to do with what you post? Do you really think that I take what "Ethan Winer" says seriously, because it is said to be his name?!
And have you ever heard of a guy named Arnold Kreuger? It's obvious you haven't given any of this much thought. You should do that, before you try and go and have our policies rewritten to suit your highly questionable beliefs. Anyway, beside that this has been discussed before, the tail end of this post is not the place to discuss it! Of couse, you're free to debate this elsewhere in an appropriate way. Tip: if you do and hope to win your debate, you're going to have to do -much- better than what I see here. Because trust me, this is only a warm-up excercise for me! 
Here's Ethan's first reply to Ted's posting of his data (quoted in entirety:)
Sorry for the long quote, but Ethan's first reply to the data included his recognition of the impossibility of the data being correct.
The fact that he gave Ted enough credit to assign motives to the offering of bad data instead of thinking more alone the lines of incompetence with the program has become a side light to Ethan's immdediate and forceful comments questioning the veracity of the data.
Ethan was immdiately correct about the data not being correct - which Ted later admitted.
Again, Ethan probably gave Ted too much credit, and he left "incompetently prepared data" off his list of reasons for the badness of the data quality Ted provided. If Ethan, had added, "or you screwed up working the program in the first place," would that have been more to your liking?
_
If Ted posted the data, then he was representing himself as being an expert about his own product and the tools he was using in order to demonstrate his product's effect.
Moving on, though...
I actually hope on the repeat that we get viable data, so I can then watch Ethan wail about how the differences, however real, must somehow be inaudible!
Worth posting again (and again and again...):
Online liars use more words
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
Not gonna happen Buddha, unless Ted measures in a room 1 by 1 by 1 feet or smaller.
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
I am still not sure exactly where NC stands on the issue of being impartial regarding Ethan Winer's beliefs and behaviours. I haven't read too much of anything from NC in general, so that may be why. But I don't think I got any sense of what I would call "anger" from the posts I read. Nor what I would call "clear objectivity" on the Ethan issue either. Hence my uncertainty. I do agree however, that on the issue of Ethan's credibility re: his charges of fraud and falsification, and other unsupported accusations against Ted, he has been buried six feet under and is scrambling throughout these parts to try to shine the turd that his reputation has become.
As they say, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. So Ethan in drag isn't fooling anyone, who's mind and soul aren't already bought and paid for by Ethan Winer. It is fun however, trying to see them defend Ethan's incompetence over Ted's test data to me, you or others, and fall flat on their faces doing so. If weasel Winer can't and won't even defend himself, I don't know how his lickspittles and sycophants think they are going to do better. Because the evidence to support their bullshit just isn't there!
Here's a further related thought on that:
With room testing software in an uncontrolled environment, it's common for small changes to show up between successive runs even when nothing in the test changes. For example, a slight rumble from passing traffic outside can skew the test. How much skewing you get depends on how much rumble gets into the room. But it's rare for consecutive runs to vary more than half a dB or so. The simplest check is to simply do each Before and each After test several times in a row. I'm sure JA's expert understands this and will account for it, assuming he even uses consumer type room measuring software.
Acoustic labs also vary from one run to the next - generally by much more than a "home made" test, believe it or not - but for a very different reason. I doubt JA's expert will test Ted's magic saki bowls in a lab, mostly because that's very expensive and is not needed for a simple "pass/fail" test.
Ethan Winer
Proud owner of RealTraps, but posting on my own behalf
And always using my real name
I thank you for bringing this to our attention Steve. I know it took time to collect this evidence, but it does prove several points here, which tie in to Ethan's attacks on Synergistic. Because they exhibit a pattern of dishonesty and lack of professional integrity on the part of Mr. Winer. This shows that the real motives behind Ethan Winer attacking his direct competitor, Ted Denney, accusing him of selling snake oil, are purely business-related. And not as Ethan would have us all believe, just him being "the brave snake oil fighter, fighting to protect gullible audiophiles from being taken in".
Quite the contrary. Ethan, who now officially exhibits the lowest integrity of anyone I have seen on audio groups, appears to have an anti-competitive shilling agenda that transverses across all public audio forums. One in which he has been caught posting under several sockpuppet shill accounts on AudioJunkies, to drive potential customers to his products, and away from Ted's. And now, posting on AVS as a self-professed expert, to fool those who feel they are not the authority on acoustics that he is, and will just blindly accept whatever he says about audio. This it appears has allowed Ethan to conduct a scam on forumers, that would have them believing that faults in the measurement process are related to improper room treatment. Which of course, is all with the intention of having them visit his website and order more room treatment products! To this end, I noticed that on AVS, Mr. Winer has absolutely no problem listing his affiliation in every post, and a neat little shortcut to where you can buy his products!! This is his sig there!:
Ethan Winer
RealTraps.com
The acoustic treatment experts
----------------
This sort of thing makes me sick to my stomach, really. So I'm just not going to comment any further, before I say something I regret.
Actually, this is:
"Subject - A liar will often change the subject; a liar will be comfortable with the change with the belief that his lies have been believed. If honest, a person would be confused as to why a potentially serious subject would be changed. He would be more likely to disregard the subject change and pursue the original conversation."
From "How To Spot A Liar". http://www.howtodothings.com/family-relationships/how-to-spot-a-liar
For the honest reader, I submit the original conversation. (And no, Ethan has not refuted "The Conclusion", and proven his case of fraud and falsification against Ted D. Ethan is still, so far as we know, vulnerable to litigation for his defamatory accusations):
http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/printthread.php?Board=rants&main=76695&type=post
So Ethan has been conning unsuspecting audiophiles and audio pros into destroying their listening rooms with the use of bass traps and absorbtion panels.
The horror. The horror.
Thank goodness we have a few soldiers of truth here to save those poor fools from the terror of Ethan's products and "free" advice.
You know, if there was anyone who had a legitimate gripe here, it's Ethan.
On the other hand, the credibility of the liars who attack him is so low that their negative lies almost constitute an endorsement.
And the Funniest Post of the Day Award goes to.......
"You know, if there was anyone who had a legitimate gripe here, it's Ethan."
Ok, so you just showed that you were unable to understand Steve's evidence or know how to read a graph. I am truly shocked by that news, Scotty.
Truly shocked. Especially since Steve's post was longer than 6 words, and you recently admitted you don't have the intelligence to read anything beyond that. So I think you need to keep your retarded kindergarten comments and self out of serious debates like this, and go put your mascara on or something. Try to keep yourself busy by not being an annoying fool.
"Free advice" that is intended to lead the misinformed reader to the well known commercial website of the author of that advice. Another amazingly intelligent comment from you Scott. How DO you do it.
Nothing new.
Fox News is great at this.
Example:
"Who was the last President to balance the budget?"
Fox news: "Blow jobs! Whitewater! Hillary is the antichrist! Reagan did it! Socialism! Teabags!"
Same here with the CoD.
Ted posts bogus data, Ethan is therefore evil.
Did you see any of them asking Ted to get his shit together next time?
Ethan is one scary guy, out vandalizing the hobby like he does.
We can get far more relelvant information about room acoustics from one of my Bulldog's farts than we can from any of your posts.
It is amazing.
Hi Buddha,
Glad to see you are at least willing to see if 3rd party data shows one way or the other. I am also waiting.
But Ethan was also attacking Ted on everything including fraud, lying etc. How do we know Ethan actually knew the problem and was not simply attacking just for the sake of attacking?
Imputing nafarious motives when Ted could have simply made a mistake seems unreasonable to me. Maybe you see things another way though.
Take care and have a great week.
It was presumptuous but hardly unreasonable. Bottom line is Ethan nailed the data for what it was, bogus. That was a clear demonstration of his expertise. I still want to know why you didn't see that the data was obviously bogus? How about the judgement shown in posting that bogus data? You'd think Ted should have recognized the huge problem in his own data.
Actually, implying nefarious intent was a bit over the top, Ethan.
Yes, it is interesting that on AVS, Ethan flat out admits that he provide false infomation and graph. And yet we see above those who continue to deny any such wrong doing.
But you will see such denials, as above on this page, and maybe even worse coming.
Remember though, its the people that counts. They work hard for their money and I don't think they appreciate being duped, like they just witnessed on AVS forum string that I disclosed on page 13, post # #76780, string:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1063837
Outcomes, my brother.
Was Ethan correct about the data being bogus?
I guess the way we know that Ethan knew is his intentionally black and white response. No equivocating, eh?
He put it all the line. If he had been wrong, all kinds of bad things could have happened to him, including this bullshit about 'saved as evidence' stuff.
Did Ethan leave any room for prevarication or backtracking in his opinion?
No.
Then, Ted admitted to using flawed data in his prcolamation about "proof positive!"
Ted was pretty damned definitive, too.
Two absolutely contrary interpretations of the data, with Ted having a several month head start to verify and vet his data - undone in the blink of an eye by Ethan's response.
So, "How do we know Ethan actually knew the problem and was not simply attacking just for the sake of attacking?"
Gotta look at the results...Ethan knocked the ball out of the park.
Either that, or did you think Ethan got amazingly lucky right as he was about to get crushed by his own proclamation?
What Ethan said was pretty definitive, it predicted the future, and was shown to be correct about the data being unacceptable.
Pages