| 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
This would be very interesting. I've looked and can't find it.
No offense, but how much time did you spend looking? An hour? 20 minutes? 2 minutes? 30 seconds?
What do you want me to do? I'm not the administrator of this forum. Have SM bow down to your demands and provide me the powers to do as I please on this forum for one hour. Would that make you happy? Of course not! Nothing makes you happy.
Now, about "calling out" someone. What exactly have you been doing on this forum if not "calling out" JA and Ted? What is the composition of your numerous demands for "proof" if they are not calling out someone to bow to your wishes? Why are you on this forum at all given that you make no positive contributions if you are not here solely to "call out" those with whom you disagee? Look at your own post here, you "call me out" to do the leg work on a ART system review.
Why, oh, why do you not read your own BS before hitting "submit"?
Really, D'Ethan, you are a bore!
"Jan Vag"?!!! And you came by that how? You think that is supposed to infer what? You are about to finish what grade in school?
I have to say, if you are trying to convince anyone you are not a sockpuppet for someone with far more intelligence than that display of scatological muckraking indicates, you're doing a good job of convincing everyone you are an idiot of the highest magnitude. Good job, D'Ethan! Even at your worst to me - when you peaked in my house, when you made up fake Facebook pages and when you had a poll of my system - you never stooped this low. None of your other socks did either.
Tell you what, why don't you post your ISP? Let's make certain you are not doing your dirty work from an anonymous provider behind which you can hide. Sounds resonable to me. If you prefer not to do so, then we have more proof you are who we claim - of course, you know that. If you are not a sockpuppet, then you should have no problem divulging your ISP.
The ball is in your court, D'Ethan. Isn't that one of your favorite sayings?
One of the things I absolutely detest about the naysayers is your complete lack of memory. It's no wonder you can't perceive any differences between components or cables or devices, you can't remember long enough for a comparison!
Something can be explained to you multiple ways on numerous occasions and none of you get it. I suspect you don't get that. You couldn't get that if it was handed to you on a stick to "get".
You also don't seem capable of finding your way out of a swinging screen door. But that's our D'Ethan!
Awww, see? you prove my point.
"Frog boy"? Now where have we heard that before and from whom?
Sockpuppet, proxy, someone being fed information by another, they all follow you around it has been said.
Do you really suggest I contact Michigan? You can have your wish. Just post your ISP and we'll proceed from there.
May has cited this example a number of times in the past. There have been other threads referring to this as well (in the context of a member's father with hearing aids if I recall correctly).
I have access to and have looked in the medical literature a number of times. I have yet to find anything.
If you have the article please share.
If no offense is meant, what exactly is the purpose of your question?
They have been explained as much a Ted is required to do. That you haven't looked is not his fault.
Perhaps you will step in with a positive addition by setting forth with your thoughts on how they work. Yes?
You state you possess a working theory as to how they work. Thus I wrote, "You say you have ideas as to how it works. Please share. I, and others, are interested."
We are interested. Indeed, if these little guys do as claimed I would be absolutely fascinated.
Please provide us with the benefit of your analysis and conclusions. Perhaps this will move the thread in a positive direction.
Yes, you did create a rule. However, like the Bush administration, you simply did not enforce the rule evenly and you looked the other way at one particularly gross abuser of that rule because, according to JA, cronyism took hold as he had broken bread with one member and enjoyed his cello playing.
You and I have frequently seen different things occurring on this forum, haven't we? I've told you certain things were about to happen and you ignored them even when they did occur.
Ok, let's set aside the fact you have only sporadically and without good justification ignored the rule you cite. How did Ted "promote his products or discredit the products of others"? He stated the profit margin of RealTraps, do you not believe his numbers? They are relatively easy to check.
When Ted was called a charlatan and a fraud by the opposing party on multiple occasions, why didn't you impose the same rules on that individual? Even just once, why didn't you do so? RealTraps, as far as I can see, has nothing to do with the individual who would not sign his name to a signature line as the owner of RealTraps - even though this is a rule of the forum and he was told to do so on numerous occasions by several people with the power to have him face the consequences of such insolence. But you did nothing. How many times did the owner of RealTraps trash his competitors on this forum while you stood aside and allowed it? After "the rule" had been made? How did Ted discredit Realtraps when his comments were not aimed at Realtraps the company?
I'm not seeing how your administration of this forum and your enforcement of the rules has been evenhanded, Stephen.
Then, possibly, you should have made that clear to both parties during the many times Ted was attacked on this forum and called a charlatan and a fraud by a competitor. Or when a competitor stated repeatedly and flatly it was impossible for Ted's designs (and those of other competitors) to accomplish what they claim despite evidence from the Stereophile staff this was not the case.
You didn't.
Your bad!
Uh, ... well, you closed the thread rather than allow Ted's post to enter. You stated he should have come to you before posting while you made no such "suggestions" to any other member who was calling him a fraud over many months of posting on this forum. Do you really need me to go on?
If you had been consistent in what you have decided to be of "value" on this forum, I would say we simply disagree. But, how about the posts where my property was observed by another member, or the fake Facebook pages added by another member, or the polls of my system taken by two members, or the time I was challenged to a bar fight, or when the "little black kid" joke offended anyone with any sene of fairness and morality or ... do you really need me to go on?
Those all had "value" to you, I assume, since you allowed them to remain on the forum and stood idly by while they were being made and as their consequences escalated.
You and I clearly have a different sense of what is of "value" to an audio forum.
But what is Ted to think when it's clear the rules are enforced at your whim and without evenhanded distribution?
I think it sucks!
I see, then you would have no objection to D'Ethan posting his ISP here. You would even encourage him to do so to clear the matter up?
NO! Work this out for yourself, Elk, and stop asking for things to be handed to you. I've discussed this system and others like it on this forum in multiple threads, you've even been in on the thread at times.
Elk, for the umpteenth time, no, I am not going to feed you what you can find out on your own if you only open your mind and think.
Now stop asking!
First of all, you completely miss May's point. Second of all, you prove May's point. You do not understand the devices yet you will make no attempt to understand the devices until they are operating in the same way things that make sense to you operate. They don't operate like that! And, once again, no! I am not going to tell you how I think they operate.
You are so convinced these devices do not work, you simply won't try them to see for yourself if they do. You are so convinced the devices do not work you continually make references to their not working compared to what you think works. That is closedminded bigotry at work, Elk.
I have a nephew who happens to be gay and he thinks he should be a Republican like his mother. I've told him he should never trust anyone - partiucularly those on talk radio - who uses the term "those people" or "you people" Most especially do not trust anyone who attempts to make other groups appear "like" an individual. I find the individuals about whom I am speaking - the serial abusers of this policy who use the word "like" too much - to almost always be liars, hypocrits and scumbags.
Got it!
You have no clue how these little devices could possibly affect the sound and resent being asked.
Let's assume this is true. So how do they work?
Perhaps you can use May as an example of how to approach these topics. May doesn't hesitate to explain the theories being her products and will patiently, and kindly, discuss them. Many of us have had great conversations with her even though we do not necessarily agree.
If you know or have an idea, tell us. If you don't have a clue, tell us.
Discussion. I have faith you can do it!
> liars, hypocrits and scumbags.
I am confident I have no need to explain to the regulars here what "a person like Jan" means. You on the other hand need to spell it all out in your usual unpleasant manner. Don't you think life is a bit unfair in making you work this hard?
Page after page of rants from Jan "I have sand in my vagina" Vigne. Understand the "vag" reference now? I swear you are so dense that a fence post has a higher IQ than you do
So you want my IP address because? Not thanks wacky Jan I'd rather not have any loonies like you showing up at my doorstep anytime soon
So you own NONE of Ted's products. So why defend his BS? yeah yeah yeah whatever.
So you do know how to contact Michigan? Interesting since no one else on here seems to know who he really is
No Elk he doesn't have a clue nor will he admit either way. He would rather keep thinking I'm Ethan. I guess the feeble minded are kind of limited on how many thoughts they can keep going at once
Life is always unfair on some level. You could ease my burden by going away and never returning.
Tooodles!
You're back to reposting my entire responses just to make it look like you have something to say when you do not. Let's see how this dumb as rocks post of your's plays out.
Now, where did it begin? Oh, yes, way down at the bottom of everything important ...
Yes, I understand it, it is moronic and sophomoric coming from a supposed adult. You do realize you've broken one of the forum rules, don't you? SM, do your duty.
I didn't want anyone peaking in my house either but it happened. You'll be happy to know I care to stay as far away from you as possible. All I want is your ISP to prove you are not in hiding. You won't do that? That seals the deal as to your identity. Only a sockpuppet would hide. SM, do your duty.
That makes no sense, which also proves your true identity. STFU or get over it?! No, that's not how it goes. Try this instead ...
No, you're right, I'll do neither since you put it that way.
Says the sock with nothing but attack posts. Say, that reminds me, you never did point me to where you've posted anything positive on this forum. Now would be a good time to do that too. Then follow with your ISP just so we can check your hiding places. I won't come anywhere near you, I promise.
As usual, you are drawing dumb conclusions based on faulty information. I never said I did not own any of Ted's products. But, of course, you wouldn't remember that, it was mentioned more than two seconds ago. I do not own the ART system and I explained that too - ten seconds ago.
Nor have I defended any of Ted's products. I have just been here to do what I told you I would whenever you attacked him or his company. You continue so I continue. You stop and then I stop. Or, as usual we go until SM closes the thread. Makes no difference to me. I've been here a long time and I'l still be here after your sorry sockpuppet ass has been booted off again.
You know what? I'm sure Ted and JA feel the same way about you, that's why they've given you so much of their time.
Interesting? But only to a select few I'm sure.
Sure I know how to contact him. Anyone who looked could find him, he has a website that has been mentioned on this forum several times. But, D'Ethan, you already knew that, didn't you? You've been leaving him messages on the Stereophile blogs, haven't you?
Anyone claiming to be in charge of this forum realize that?
You two have been going at it on other forums too from what I can make out. So you should be able to contact him if you really wanted to. Just give us your ISP and I'll send him word to drop you a line.
Me? I don't make websites and as far as I know, Michigan has his own and that's enough for him. Why? Were you worried the ethanwinerexposed.webs.com pages might be back - or added to? Those sure did a job on you, didn't they? All the tricks you use and all the BS you propogate to get your socks and proxies in place.
One of these days SM will catch on to you. Say! why don't you give that ISP so he can doublecheck now that he knows you've been on the blogs?
I can understand why you'd like to stay in hiding while you attack Ted and anyone who disagrees with you - where have we seen that before? - but you can go ahead and tell us the ISP. Your days on this forum are numbered anyway. SM do your duty.
You know, your delusions of grandeur are quite tiresome.
"SM, do your duty."
If only...
If it were just based on paranoia and verbal assault you'd be the first to go JV.
I was surprised it wasn't you too when Froggy and Ethan went, but since you were "quiet" for a few months it must have been a temporary ban perhaps? Those months the tone definitely took on a more reasoned demeanor. If you weren't a permanent troll of the forum before, you certainly are now.
I almost wish we had DUP around instead. He had a better sense of humor at least.
Why not show us your ISP, jj? You are "jj", right?
You must be since you've been stalking me all across the forum. Cease and desist instantly and apologize immediately!!!
The latest Sterophile holiday? Sockpuppet Day!
I have no explanation for why anyone would think the guy telling the intentionally offensive and clearly racist "the little black kid" joke has a "sense of humor". But I'm damn sure I don't want to be around the person telling the joke or the person laughing at it.
You want dup's sense of humor? Go! get off the forum and find him. I'm sure he hasn't changed one wit. Find him and maybe he'll invite you over to listen to his system - that always proved ... "enlightening".
Go!
No one is holding you back. Why come back here if you don't like what's here? If you think there's something better somewhere else, why would you even want to stay here? You don't like me, why read my posts? You do it to yourself and then complain to me that you are stupid enough to read something you know you won't like. Maybe someone should be telling "the little dbowker kid" jokes, eh?
You've been a PITA since I got back here, so go away. Stop reading my posts and most of all stop complaining that you read what you don't like.
"Bwaaaaw, Ma, I was an ididot and I did something that I shouldn't. Make them stop putting up telephone poles that I run into."
But you won't go away, will you? You like reading my posts, don't you? If you didn't, there would be no reason to continue doing so. You like being an idiot who runs into telephone poles.
No, like all the rest you like an audio forum where audio is never discussed but you can insult people behind anonymous avatars. You like the idea you can call someone a charlatan and a fraud and slam their integrity. You've done nothing but that since I came back. This whole forum likes the negative posts. Never think, never learn, just bitch.
Go find dup and take the lot of this forum with you. He liked being a hero to people who laughed at little black kid jokes, so I'm sure he'll be glad to have his ol'peanut gallery back. And do not labor under the assumption the Stereophile forum couldn't survive without you.
>>> "Sounds awesome, do you have a link to that article?" <<<
I have already explained to you before, Buddha. The trials and their results were not published as a medical article. The trials I described were the first part of a series of planned ongoing trials which unfortunately were never completed. Presumably if they HAD been continued and completed, then (again presumably) they would have been "written up" as part of ongoing (hearing) medical research..
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
>>> "I have access to and have looked in the medical literature a number of times. I have yet to find anything." <<<
As I have explained before in Stereophile, the first trials (which took place in 1985) and their results were not published as a medical article - they were shown to me as part of the ongoing work we were involved with, within the Audiology department of the hospital. I described them within a paper I did in 1986 - which has always been available on our Home Page - for anyone to read who was interested !!!.
The trials I described were the first part of a series of planned ongoing trials on hearing aids which unfortunately were never completed. Again, I have explained why those planned ongoing trials were never completed.
Just at the moment I cannot find the exact response I did to Buddha on Stereophile. I do however remember that it was shortly after J Gordon Holt's death was announced (July 2009) and as I judged that the time was not quite appropriate, I refrained from giving a complete explanation as to why the trials were never completed.
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
Jan: I'm confident in saying that most of us here do not like these kinds of negative posts. In fact, I'm not sure that anyone likes them. Instead of criticizing and making things worse, why don't you try to make things better?
It's clear to me that you've been causing severe disruptions to the forum, inciting disputes with many forum members. You, like everyone here, are given the freedom to say what you will, knowing (I hope) that you will be held responsible for your words.
But please know that the few positive contributions you make to the forum, in terms of offering insightful audio-related opinions and advice, do not grant you the right to be a disruption.
This creates a difficult situation for me -- and all of the forum members, I think -- in that I cannot rationally ask you to be a different person. I can only ask that you please try to be more productive, and less abrasive, with your contributions here. I ask the same from everyone; we can all do better. And I will continue to try to find ways to make the forum a fun and interesting place to spend time.
Jan, if your negative contributions here continue to overshadow your positive contributions, we'll have to come up with some other ideas about how to change for the better. Maybe some time away from the forum will be beneficial.
Edit: I'll keep this thread open for now because I think there are valuable points, and I see that members are trying hard to keep it on track. As we proceed, let's please try to keep the thread positive and productive.
What sort of negative posts are you referring to, Stephen?
You quoted me and addressed me but you didn't mention the negative post I was replying to. That completely negative post has "value" in your estimation?
Or, maybe you didn't like the post I addressed to you providing proof of exactly what you consider to be of "value" to an audio forum? You know everything I mentioned is true and that gets under your skin. Good, it was meant to. I'd suggest you read it again to see just what sort of forum you have created here.
You and I certainly do not see eye to eye when it comes to what and who is of value to this forum. But, if you prefer to overlook the "sand in my vagina" post to bitch at me, well, that is your right. But I do get to say my piece also, right?
The same deal has always applied to everyone as far as I'm concerned, SM. You stop the BS like that and then I stop responding to BS like that. You allow that to proceed and I will respond. It's your decision to make not mine so stop blaming me for your negligence. I don't hold grudges but its pretty clear that even when I try to engage in a discussion of audio on this forum there's going to be someone who prefers to shut it down just for their own enjoyment.
SM, in my estimation you are absolutely worthless as an administrator of this forum. You're too busy keeping your nose up JA's butt to actually do anything of "value" to this forum. You have no real power until you get the OK from John to do something and, if he prefers to have Ethan on this forum despite his breaking any so called "rule" you might impose, you have no choice but to allow Ethan to break any rule you impose. You make private agreements between two warring parties and then allow one of them - Ethan - to break the agreement while holding the other to it.
You allow post after post of crap and the homophobic and disgusting BS bigotry that comes from Lamont to stand while nothing positive ever gets done on this forum. You dispense your "rules" based on who plays cello and who you drink with at CES and allow manufacturers who are attempting to advance the audio market to be attacked and disparaged relentlessly by know nothings who are only here to attack and tear down what Gordon Holt created.
You have the forum you want and the one you deserve. Once again, I can only say, don't blame me for what you've done or for what you have not done to make this forum productive.
Oh, and be careful, SM, there's another telephone pole right up ahead of you whether I'm here or not.
I didn't want to make this all about you, but here are some examples from just the last few weeks. If we look at just the last few days, the examples become even more glaring. That said, we could go back to 2005, and find plenty of examples, as well.
3/25:
4/5:
4/6:
4/6:
5/13:
5/20:
Yes, the context has been removed, but it really doesn't matter. The fact remains that you offer an enormous -- I would say, an often overwhelming -- amount of negativity to this forum.
On the other hand, here's an example of one of your positive contributions:
4/19:
I think the forum would be a much better place if more of your posts could be like that final example.
Yes, the context has been removed since it would appear you do not notice it. I've stated this repeatedly on this forum, I respond to what I receive. The Dyna post had no agenda attached to it and therefore I posted as I always do to a nonpartisan member of this forum, someone interested in discussing audio on a supposed audio forum. How many of those members do we actually have here? I can count them on one hand and have fingers left over for the rest.
Really, SM, are you that blind to not see what I am responding to? Why do you choose to ignore the "context" of what I am responding to?
How about we apply a bit of that "context" to this post?
And, here we have a post from someone who has not been involved in this thread in any way but showed up just to post this ...
Doesn't this forum have an "ignore" feature that's very convenient to apply to a member you find unappealling? Wouldn't you say, SM, that applying that "ignore" function to someone you find to be a "troll" and certainly uninteresting to read would have been a less "disruptive" approach to the matter than hitting "submit" on that last quote?
No?
I am confused here, SM, are those the type of posts you would prefer I emulate? Are those the posts you consider to be "positive" and having "value" to an audio forum?
Just to be clear, those are all taken from this thread alone. Those are all the "context" you ignored when you claimed my posts were being "disruptive". Take a look at the members who originally posted those quotes, how many of them have a history of never posting anything positive on this forum?
Here's one more quote from this thread which I made as a response to a "negative" post I received...
Now, if this discussion goes as all the rest of our discussions have gone, SM, you will eventually get mad because I am pointing out facts you choose to ignore and you will tell me to "just do as you are told". You have that right. I just think it's very unfair to single out the one person who can and does post something like ...
I am in absolute agreement with you, Stephen, the forum would be a far better place if all the posts were like that last example of my writing. However, until you wake up and see what is going on here when you allow the first 15 quotes on this page to exist in 18 pages of a single thread, then the only thing I can say is, I respond to what I receive. When it stops, I stop. You have the ability to stop either side or both. What is your preference?
That you only see me as the problem is something I can only take as you have the forum you want and the forum you deserve. You prefer an anti-audiophile forum where anyone wishing to discuss audio is shouted down and where the majority of the members don't even allow a discussion of cable changes without insulting the intelligence of the op. You have a forum where a request for advice on albums to listen to is met with insults about the intelligence of anyone wanting to listen to that band. You have a forum where disruption is encouraged by too many and we are all "pussies" if we aren't brawling.
When you stop what is in those first 15 quotes and all the rest that goes with it I'll have more time to devote to the Dyna type responses.
Now, might I mention this thread has gone on as long as it has and has become as heated as it has in part because JA made a statement which has been at the heart of this thread from the beginning. I really don't care whether he follows through on what he said might happen or whether he doesn't. But, his silence has undoubtedly been a cause of friction here. Don't you think a little of the contentiousness of this thread might have been alleviated had JA simply made a statement on this thread regarding his previous comments? Or, is that my fault too?
Thanks, May!
I'll check it out.
Sorry I missed your previous explanation.
Are you referring to the possibility of Stereophile commissioning an independent expert to evaluate the ART system and Mr. Atkinson's explanation "The plan was contingent on a new listening room being built from the ground up and having its acoustics comprehensively measured before adding the Art system."?
This would be incredibly cool. Having access to such a room would be great for evaluating many tweaks, both generally accepted and controversial.
Perhaps we will soon get an update on how this plan is progressing.
In the meantime, Jan, you are the only one here that indicates that you have an idea of how these products work. It would be great if you shared your thoughts with us.
We can use this as a springboard for getting this thread back on track.
> This would be incredibly cool. Having access to such a room would be great for evaluating many tweaks, both generally
> accepted and controversial.
Why? If they are going to make an audible change to the sound field in a normal living room then that will be straightforward to measure in a normal living room (subject of course to knowing how to take reliable measurements in a normal living room).
> In the meantime, Jan, you are the only one here that indicates that you have an idea of how these products work.
I am confident I know how these products work. Ethan is confident he knows how these products work to the extent he successfully called Ted. I would expect a handful of other to also share this confidence.
I'm fairly sure I know why people think these work.
I'm the only here who (I'm not a "that", Elk) indicates I've taken the time and expended the effort to have any ideas about how the ART devices successfully perform their stated tasks. Possibly someone else here has their own ideas but they are not willing to come forward in such a hostile, anti-audiophile atmosphere.
Stop asking the question, Elk. That's the last time I'm going to respond to it. Every next time - given how you've gone about this - will be treated as another piece of gamesmenship amounting to harrassment on your part. Any "if you don't know" responses will be taken as another intentional insult, exactly as they are meant. The game ends here. Get off the wagon, Elk.
Certainly placebo is a possible explanation although I'm fairly certain Jan would dispute that
...................for about 3 pages.
Good guess, except he said he thinks he knows *why* people think these work, not *how.*
Perhaps he's got something more devious that mere placebos up his sleeve. I'm on the edge of my seat.
Would that be a QM seat, kinda string like and perched between branes ?
Good comeback!
Ever notice how they claim "science" but can never explain the science, but have to demand others to explain it to them.
Yet they are jolly on the spot when it comes to funneling the viewer's finances to them (or their friends).
Cheers.
Now that you mention it, I have noticed that from time to time.
"The ancient mysteries have spawned many myths, but that does not mean they themselves are fiction." - The Lost Symbol
An avowed manufacturer, accusing others of self-promotion in violation of the board rules.
What a surprise.
I would suggest reading the rules again JJ.
The rule applies to manufacturers against manufacturers, not to those who are not manufacturers, such as individuals, shills etc, and no products were defamed. I did not target or name any manufacturers. Huge difference. 
This has been explained by the moderator to you and others before JJ.
Cheers.
Besides, you are a Designer, D, who Manufactures , M, so as a D you can dis M. : D>M , As an M dis D.
But under no circumstances can you M&M.
It's just as well, I bet you need to loose weight anyway.
There has been alot of useful material hidden in the thread.
Geoff tells us the bowls are too small to vibrate. (Pssst, don't tell him what those teeny quartz crystals in his Savant Timepiece manage to do.)
We also learned that a battery life test of Belt treatments has been impossible to replicate in the 25 years since it was first 'demonstrated.'
The bottom line question is why this product is mentioned in the "Room Tuning and Acoustics" forum. The bowls appear to do neither.
Maybe we should get everybody to list their zodiac and Chinese year signs and see if the reasons beneath all the claims about this product are based on alignments of the moon and stars.
Pop quiz for Dr. Know:
Part 1 - What is the frequency of vibration of the bowls?
Part 2 - What is the frequency of vibration of a quartz crystal in a clock?
Extra Credit: What do those frequencies have to do with anything?
The original test was not for battery life, you silly goose. But you were close. Really close.
From PWB web site article:
"However, because of my daughter's and my enthusiasm, the E.N.T. consultant requested the audiology technician to carry out some preliminary trials, with the proviso that the patients should be selected at random, that the patients own hearing aid should be used and that the patients own battery should be used. I came away from the hospital convinced that nothing would happen, no tests would be carried out.
Six weeks later, I accompanied my daughter when she returned to collect her ear moulding. I was met with the words "Oh, we have carried out some tests, with some very surprising results". I was shown the list of the patients tested and the ticks showing which had registered an improvement. Over 75% of the patients tested had registered that an improvement had taken place. They had also been asked to describe briefly this improvement and the list read variously:- clear, clearer, clear, more natural, clearer, a lot better, clearer etc. The E.N.T. consultant now requested that the tests should continue."
Expectation Bias rears its ugly head. No Beta Test for you!
Off the top of my head, I'm guessing you're a Goat. Second guess: Snake. Am I close?
For the bowls, it's their lifeline for an even remote possibility of relevance.
So, now you believe small things can vibrate!
You are making progress, little P.T.
So, what system you listening to lately?
>>>"In the meantime, Jan, you are the only one here that indicates that you have an idea of how these products work. It would be great if you shared your thoughts with us." <<<
We can use this as a springboard." <<<
Elk, I can point to someone else who has been "thinking more on this particular subject" !! To John Atkinson !! We can use John A's thoughts as a springboard also.
To Quote John A. :-
>>> "We all now live in a bath of 2.4GHz radiation, which, coincidentally, is the frequency microwave ovens operate on. Look at the dimensions of Ted Denney's bowls: could it be that they are diffracting/reflecting that RF bath away from the listener, thus improving his state of mind and his receptivity to the music?" <<<
Just why is it not possible for (some) people to consider that the 'devices' may not be affecting the actual physical acoustics of the room but may be reducing an adverse effect in the (modern !!) listening environment ? Then their SIZE may NOT be the 'stumbling block' to a sensible discussion !!!!!
This way of looking at 'an effect' would then bring into consideration such things the Tchang Acoustic Resonators, The Schumann Resonance device, the Harmonix Devices etc. Etc. - and so many other experiences (of the sound being affected) described by people.
Whilstever so many people are prepared to 'block their minds' by dismissing so many other people's experiences as "bias"., "auto-suggestion"., "the placebo effect"., "imagination"., "audio faith healing"., "effective marketing"., - calling "bullshit" - implying "Fraud" - "demanding measurement proof" at every step and turn, how can a sensible and intelligent discussion progress ???
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
Seems like you're on the brink of telling us your theory of operation of the bowls. We wait with bated breath.
Also, see addition to my previous post regarding the original hearing aid test.
Did in the first thread about them back in the day.
Your breath would not have to be so bated if you'd been there.
Or, did you really mean the "baited" part?
(Not a spell flame, just a play on the words.)
Rat?
Bull?
Nope, really.
Pages