Great start, Freako!

Let us know what you continue to experience.

Kudos for your willingness to try.

Quote:
I couldn't resist playing a bit with the newly received tweaks, having some hours with nothing else to do.

First of all, my system wasn't warmed up, as it takes 5-6 hours for it to really show off. Listening withing the first

I had the clap, and applying the rainbow foil to my balls cleared it right up!

unfortunately now I am too sterile

Good on you Keld, brave man! Keep us posted

Quote:
unfortunately now I am too sterile

"Too Sterile"?

Think there might be another reason you're "too sterile"?

Whatever! That's the best news I've heard in months.

Quote:

Quote:
unfortunately now I am too sterile

"Too Sterile"?

Think there might be another reason you're "too sterile"?

Whatever! That's the best news I've heard in months.

Lets see what did you post just a few minutes before in another thread?

Quote:

Quote:
It shouldn't be hard. Be mature, respectful, thoughtful. You know: Don't be an asshole.

--------------------
Stephen Mejias
Stereophile

You rant but don't even live up to your own advice Jan

Quote:
Now stop it please. Do NOT derail this thread too

Derail WHAT thread? Foil on balls thread?

Here's you two NEW tweaks to try out courtesy of Geoff

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277351308

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277427856

I just can't seem to figure out where he got the idea in the first link

Quote:
No thanks

What, no smiley face? Geez, don't tell me you're trying to be serious.

Quote:
Not at all. I just don't want to encourage DL

I don't think you need to worry about that. He doesn't seem to require encouragement.

Sorry for the OT but the picture of the Sabre toothed tiger is real nice on the web page.
In fact you can easily see how possiby the concept of Aliens image design came from something exactly like that.
The comparison is striking for the head.

Only real difference is the removal of the large incisers, which became the internal teeth on the Alien.
Cheers
Orb

My, aren't we the sensitive one? I do understand you not fully comprehending the meaning of someone being an "asshole" but I realize you do your best.

Would you kindly point me in the direction of one post you've made which is not degrading in some way to someone or some company?

Someone show that picture to Elk and see if he has a better understanding of evolutionary instincts.

Hey Freako- Keep us posted despite the static on the line. I tried the foil and cream and at times it seemed to make a difference. But my hearing is also variable, so I'm not certain. I also change furnishing positions, items behind my equipment array, tv screen angle, etc.

One thing I won't do without, though, are my Belt Christmas cards with the foil strips. The goodwill greeting from a faraway country elevates my mood and attitude.

Quote:
Here's you two NEW tweaks to try out courtesy of Geoff

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277351308

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277427856

I just can't seem to figure out where he got the idea in the first link

Appears I've got a new shill. Welcome aboard!

Quote:

Quote:
Here's you two NEW tweaks to try out courtesy of Geoff

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277351308

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?accstwek&1277427856

I just can't seem to figure out where he got the idea in the first link

Appears I've got a new shill. Welcome aboard!

You can use all the "help" I can give

Quote:
Now 3 days have passed since I froze 2 cd's. One is Daboa: From the Gekko, a cd that is extremely well recorded and produced. The other is a sampler cd, also very well recorded, and of which I have an identical copy. Both cd's have been thawed over 2 days, very slowly that is.

First I listened to Daboa, and I was close to be convinced the sound was better than I remember it. I then wanted to confirm by alternating between the sampler original and the sampler copy.

Again I have to say, if there's any change, it's subtle. But I believe there is a more silent background on the frozen one. Like the jitter has been reduced audibly. Instruments (I believe) sound more natural, and the soundstage has a little more depth to it, with sounds and instruments far away sounding clearer than before.

If I had to take a bet on whether there's a real improvement, I'd hesitate, that's how subtle it is. I can't come up with more if I have to be honest, and I always want to be.

Good to see that the Belt tweaks are being shown as being what they are worth. Mainly nothing, but then most of us knew what the results would be........unless May was doing the "testing"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Surprise Surprise! One would think after being put through such a long drawn out ritual the difference would be reliable and repeatable.

But not to worry, Keld. The purveyors of this and other BS will be along shortly to give you the three reasons this tweak did not work.

You know there are three reasons

Quote:
Now 3 days have passed since I froze 2 cd's. One is Daboa: From the Gekko, a cd that is extremely well recorded and produced. The other is a sampler cd, also very well recorded, and of which I have an identical copy. Both cd's have been thawed over 2 days, very slowly that is.

First I listened to Daboa, and I was close to be convinced the sound was better than I remember it. I then wanted to confirm by alternating between the sampler original and the sampler copy.

Again I have to say, if there's any change, it's subtle. But I believe there is a more silent background on the frozen one. Like the jitter has been reduced audibly. Instruments (I believe) sound more natural, and the soundstage has a little more depth to it, with sounds and instruments far away sounding clearer than before.

If I had to take a bet on whether there's a real improvement, I'd hesitate, that's how subtle it is. I can't come up with more if I have to be honest, and I always want to be.

I appreciate your honesty and your effort. If you don't mind me asking too much, how did you verify that the CDs were identical?

Quote:
Still, I'm thankful for May's generosity.

I hope when you apply the Rainbow Foil to your balls you thank ncdrawl for his generosity!

Hi all,thought I would put my 2 cents worth in- I have been using various Belt products for about 4 years now - heard an obvious improvement with the free sample of foil and have gone on from there to try a fairly wide range of Belt products. I will freely admit that some products have produced little or no change, while some others have absolutely floored me with massive sonic changes - I don't fully comprehend May & Peter's explanations of why the products work the way they do -but it's enough for me that the ones that work for me produce a sound that is not achievable any other way. I would happily suggest that everyone try the free foil sample and if you don't hear any difference - well what have you lost?, maybe 30 minutes of your time. Why do the products appear to work for some, while others hear no difference? I have no idea - but to me , it's not that different from the general difference in tastes and preferences between all of us - otherwise we would all be listening to the same type of amp, speakers and music, all driving the same model of car, eating the same food, and be with the same type of woman.
Those out there that say that Belt products can't possibly work based on our current knowledge of electronics, physics etc seem to be saying that we know everything there is to know about these topics - surely there is more , much more that we don't yet know,compared to the minute amount of knowledge mankind has acquired to date

Quote:
...surely there is more , much more that we don't yet know,compared to the minute amount of knowledge mankind has acquired to date...

No doubt. When two different amps, both constructed similarly sound different, and we can't even explain it, we have a long way to go. Not to mention controversial tweaks...

Well, to be absolutely fair, it's not for lack of trying on the part of mfgrs that controversial tweaks haven't quite sunk in as far as the mainstream is concerned... Oh, well, these things happen.

Quote:

Well, to be absolutely fair, it's not for lack of trying on the part of mfgrs that controversial tweaks haven't quite sunk in as far as the mainstream is concerned... Oh, well, these things happen.

Now that IS the truth.

Perhaps there is something to the idea of "group intellegence".

Quote:

Quote:

Well, to be absolutely fair, it's not for lack of trying on the part of mfgrs that controversial tweaks haven't quite sunk in as far as the mainstream is concerned... Oh, well, these things happen.

Now that IS the truth.

Perhaps there is something to the idea of "group intellegence".

I think in this case you could be right.

So you improved the signal to noise of a digital source by using gay foil and cream and then freezing the data source? Warming up your system improves its sound but freezing your source improves its quality? The existing S/N of your digital source is so much greater than that of the rest of your system that any improvement is not noticible. But you already knew that.

But the S/N of the source data (music) is much less.
The S/N of the analog pre/power amp/speaker combo is much less.
And probably the S/N of your listening room is even less.

Quote:
So you improved the signal to noise of a digital source by using gay foil and cream and then freezing the data source? Warming up your system improves its sound but freezing your source improves its quality? The existing S/N of your digital source is so much greater than that of the rest of your system that any improvement is not noticible. But you already knew that.

You might have been sleeping during class but the manufacturer has explained, over and over, that the foils and cream and to some extent freezing the CD have nothing whatsoever to do with the audio signal. So yelping about S/N ratio and signal quality simply confirm that the explanation has not yet sunk in.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

Quote:

You might have been sleeping during class but the manufacturer has explained, over and over, that the foils and cream and to some extent freezing the CD have nothing whatsoever to do with the audio signal. So yelping about S/N ratio and signal quality simply confirm that the explanation has not yet sunk in.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

Captain! Could it be...

a

PLACEBO!?

Quote:

Quote:

You might have been sleeping during class but the manufacturer has explained, over and over, that the foils and cream and to some extent freezing the CD have nothing whatsoever to do with the audio signal. So yelping about S/N ratio and signal quality simply confirm that the explanation has not yet sunk in.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

Captain! Could it be...

a

PLACEBO!?

Geez, Louise! Even Rain Man knows it's not a placebo.

"It's not a placebo. It's definitely not a placebo!"

Quote:

Quote:

You might have been sleeping during class but the manufacturer has explained, over and over, that the foils and cream and to some extent freezing the CD have nothing whatsoever to do with the audio signal. So yelping about S/N ratio and signal quality simply confirm that the explanation has not yet sunk in.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

Captain! Could it be...

a

PLACEBO!?

I must admit I am a bit of a pickler when I see the use of placebo in discussions relating to audio because technically it is a placebo effect and placebo test, specifically related to medical research/therapy and where monitored in such studies is shown to actually trigger a change or reaction in terms of chemical response in the brain or additional activity in specific regions.

I can and do appreciate that we (some are anyway such as JJ and also includes myself with others) are talking about expectation bias but again another study has shown this is related to change and activity in the brain and is seperate from actual bias weighting relating to decision making by processing information/facts as it does actually improve our perception of enjoyment in the context of audio.

So as a discussion point as this then becomes a headache I think it is better if the placebo test/effect are only used in audio when a true placebo controlled study is implemented using audio equipment.
That said this is only possible with some type of audio equipments IMO, due the fact in a placebo test only one of the products can function.
Expanding upon that I mean you could not have a real amp product and a placebo amp, same goes for cables,etc.

Hence why placebo should probably not be used in audio discussions as it is does not truly fit.
However what can be used is specifically expectation bias where testing can be done with several active products and measured/monitored response from the listener (such as the mOFC study relating to wines and enjoyment scale vs suggested price).

Anyway this is where it becomes a bit tricky because one could argue that a product works IF it actually stimulates enjoyment by an actual response even if a "tweak" has absolutely no other affect, while others also have a valid point that if it is only this mechanism or similar functioning then the product is not working.
For the general listener who feels this product works, it does not matter to them whether it is situation A or B.

For others who want greater clarification I can appreciate the discussions around expectation bias, perception of improvements, and whether a product is working without the said effect.
However we need to differentiate between placebo effect and its related testing, and that of other expectation biases relating to greater mOFC activity that boosts enjoyment.

Before anyone comments, yes I appreciate placebo effect/testing can be classified as a type of expectation/conditioning situation but for reason outlined above IMO should be kept seperate from audio as we are truly never using a placebo but do use expectation in terms of a product quality/price.

Cheers
Orb

Quote:
Before anyone comments, yes I appreciate placebo effect/testing can be classified as a type of expectation/conditioning situation but for reason outlined above IMO should be kept seperate from audio as we are truly never using a placebo

It's been done, Orb. Strictly speaking, using foil vs. no foil is a test of placebo alone, which is not the usual way, but in fact real tests of "this" vs. "placebo version of this" have been done a few times. Null tests with labels and switches are certainly a form of placebo testing, and I've done at least one of those myself. Granted, I wasn't too surprised to see positive results, but that follows from below:

Quote:

but do use expectation in terms of a product quality/price.

Cheers
Orb

Product quality and price are not necessary here. All that one needs to know is that something, anything, is present vs. not present. One's prejudices on quality and price may influence the direction of one's perception.

Expectation bias can and does occur if you know that something is present vs. not present. It can be something that is of no intrinsic positive or negative value, if it's presented as something that makes a difference.

Attentional focusing is not just a good idea, it's how we work, and it's very close to a fundamental property of cognition, as it's unclear to me how cognition, or at least self-awareness, can exist without being able to shift one's attention to different parts of a stimulus.

Tell somebody "that thing that looks like legos affects the high end", and people will focus on the high end. Or whatever you tell them. A few will be contrarian, perhaps, too, but most will still look for differences of some sort.

Shift the observer's attention, and the memory of what you saw/heard/whatever changes accordingly. It's part of being human.

This kind of thing has been demonstrated with hearing and vision many times. The hoary old "backward masking" foofraw from "Stairway to Heaven" is a good example. Play part of it without showing people the words, no words, maybe a few guesses here and there. Play it and tell the people to read the words along with it, oh yeah, there are the words, all of them, and easily understood. Take away the words, now people remember part of them, and can easily identify part, but no, the rest aren't there any more.

In this case, there is no placebo, and the effect is purely due to attentional shift due to expectation.

And, of course, this shift can happen without any cues at all, i.e. you don't even need a change to remember a change, all you have to do is listen differently, due to random cognition, concious or not.

That's why blind testing is so necessary if you want to know if an effect is due to the actual acoustic signal, as opposed to a purely cognative perceptual effect.

And, of course, your "superior attitude" and deliberate picking of fights is again noted for the record.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You might have been sleeping during class but the manufacturer has explained, over and over, that the foils and cream and to some extent freezing the CD have nothing whatsoever to do with the audio signal. So yelping about S/N ratio and signal quality simply confirm that the explanation has not yet sunk in.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

Captain! Could it be...

a

PLACEBO!?

I must admit I am a bit of a pickler when I see the use of placebo in discussions relating to audio because technically it is a placebo effect and placebo test, specifically related to medical research/therapy and where monitored in such studies is shown to actually trigger a change or reaction in terms of chemical response in the brain or additional activity in specific regions.

I can and do appreciate that we (some are anyway such as JJ and also includes myself with others) are talking about expectation bias but again another study has shown this is related to change and activity in the brain and is seperate from actual bias weighting relating to decision making by processing information/facts as it does actually improve our perception of enjoyment in the context of audio.

So as a discussion point as this then becomes a headache I think it is better if the placebo test/effect are only used in audio when a true placebo controlled study is implemented using audio equipment.
That said this is only possible with some type of audio equipments IMO, due the fact in a placebo test only one of the products can function.
Expanding upon that I mean you could not have a real amp product and a placebo amp, same goes for cables,etc.

Hence why placebo should probably not be used in audio discussions as it is does not truly fit.
However what can be used is specifically expectation bias where testing can be done with several active products and measured/monitored response from the listener (such as the mOFC study relating to wines and enjoyment scale vs suggested price).

Anyway this is where it becomes a bit tricky because one could argue that a product works IF it actually stimulates enjoyment by an actual response even if a "tweak" has absolutely no other affect, while others also have a valid point that if it is only this mechanism or similar functioning then the product is not working.
For the general listener who feels this product works, it does not matter to them whether it is situation A or B.

For others who want greater clarification I can appreciate the discussions around expectation bias, perception of improvements, and whether a product is working without the said effect.

However we need to differentiate between placebo effect and its related testing, and that of other expectation biases relating to greater mOFC activity that boosts enjoyment.

Before anyone comments, yes I appreciate placebo effect/testing can be classified as a type of expectation/conditioning situation but for reason outlined above IMO should be kept seperate from audio as we are truly never using a placebo but do use expectation in terms of a product quality/price.

Cheers
Orb

So, which one of you guys is actually going to sign up to test one of these things? Or is this just so much talk? You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?

On the other hand, I'm not so sure I'd be inclined to let either one of you get within 10 feet of my products as way too much excess baggage (is that the right term?).

You say you're a "bit of a pickler" when it comes to discussions about placebos. Is that anything like a stickler?

Quote:

You say you're a "bit of a pickler" when it comes to discussions about placebos. Is that anything like a stickler?

Yeah I am just more picky though
Cheers
Orb

JJ I did mull over whether to use you or Geoff on the reply as it was not necessarily about picking on a person but the actual subject use of placebo.
Look back you will see I also said exactly the same thing to May, and again to someone else in the past.

This is not about picking a fight, its more about my frustration about the use of placebo, which as I explained IMO is being used incorrectly within audio, and sadly while not a poster at AVSforum I bloody see it used way too often over there by those who do not understand the difference in the mechanisms and how this relates to testing.

I appreciate you may feel this is semantics but to me it is about the detail.

Regarding what you say about the foil test;

Quote:
It's been done, Orb. Strictly speaking, using foil vs. no foil is a test of placebo alone..

Sorry that is not a placebo test and cannot create a placebo effect as a placebo must have two products where one is the original and the other does absolutely nothing.
The foil/no foil may had been done out of sight of the listener but then this is still not placebo/placebo effect because the comparison would be to administer medication while the patient was asleep - i.e. not aware of whether taken or not for either placebo or actual medication.
Again without a duplicate any change to the environment with the awareness of the listener can or may setup a conflict where they expect a change (example of swapping audio cables) and causes a skewing of perception/decision processing.

If you mean someone has created a duplicate of the foil using a chosen inert material (would be curious what was chosen) then yeah apologies and definitely interested in what they did.
The creation of an inert duplicate is what I suggested in the bowls thread where I went into a bit more detail with Jan.

Cheers
Orb

Thanks Keld for the support

Cheers
Orb

Quote:
JJ I did mull over whether to use you or Geoff on the reply as it was not necessarily about picking on a person but the actual subject use of placebo.
Look back you will see I also said exactly the same thing to May, and again to someone else in the past.

This is not about picking a fight, its more about my frustration about the use of placebo, which as I explained IMO is being used incorrectly within audio, and sadly while not a poster at AVSforum I bloody see it used way too often over there by those who do not understand the difference in the mechanisms and how this relates to testing.

I appreciate you may feel this is semantics but to me it is about the detail.

Regarding what you say about the foil test;

Quote:
It's been done, Orb. Strictly speaking, using foil vs. no foil is a test of placebo alone..

Sorry that is not a placebo test and cannot create a placebo effect as a placebo must have two products where one is the original and the other does absolutely nothing.
The foil/no foil may had been done out of sight of the listener but then this is still not placebo/placebo effect because the comparison would be to administer medication while the patient was asleep - i.e. not aware of whether taken or not for either placebo or actual medication.
Again without a duplicate any change to the environment with the awareness of the listener can or may setup a conflict where they expect a change (example of swapping audio cables) and causes a skewing of perception/decision processing.

If you mean someone has created a duplicate of the foil using a chosen inert material (would be curious what was chosen) then yeah apologies and definitely interested in what they did.
The creation of an inert duplicate is what I suggested in the bowls thread where I went into a bit more detail with Jan.

Cheers
Orb

I can certainly appreciate that you would be frustrated by the frequent use of the placebo effect in audio discussions. I too find it odd that the placebo effect is used so much - and in almost every instance by naysayers who seem to be under the impression that raising the spectre of blind testing or the placebo effect is sufficient, in and of itself, to cast doubt on controversial tweaks. It's quite an illogical argument (placebo effect and blind testing) in many respects, assuming as it does that blind tests have not been performed, or that blind tests are disallowed or frowned upon by manufacturers or that the controversial tweaks, by their nature, must be unable pass close scrutiny.

Of all the systems I have heard, and I've heard a great many, the very best sounding ones were developed without blind testing and without any particular knowledge of, or interest in, the placebo effect or expectation bias.

Now, maybe there actually are some audiophiles out there who use blind testing to develop their systems, who may be honestly concerned about placebos and bias and such - not that there's anything wrong with that - but where the heck are they? Are they in hiding?

I'm gettin' bugged driving up and down the same old strip
I gotta find a new place where the kids are hip

My buddies and me are getting real well known
Yeah, the bad guys know us and they leave us alone

I get around
Get around round round I get around
From town to town