Assuming that the site was either allowed to copy that, or got the proper permissions, why care?

Onviously, Eric Arjes loves Hi Fi in general (not just shilling for ART,) as evidenced by his continued presence here discussing other aspects of Hi Fi!

DavidL, if you spent as much time flipping burgers as you do stalking Ted, you could easily afford to jump over to Denver and take in his demo! You could either hear nothin, or hear something and get upset that Ted somehow must have manipulated the demo! It's a no lose situation for ya!

It's only Friday - get going and report back.

If you can't go, I'll save you some time:

The results of the ART demo will be as follows:

JA: Will think he could perceive a difference, but under show conditions, it would be hard to say what this product might do for others. he will report that during the demo, one listener who had been in the room previously will came back in with the demo being done with the bowls now not in place and will spontaneously say, "Hey, where did the bass and imaging go?"

Stephen will hear a small difference and not think of the difference as being as big as some other differences he has heard.

JVS will hear a huge, vast positive, incredible, stupifying difference (especially on female soprano) and wonder how this system might synergize with those mystery plug in devices that were the hit of last year's show.

No worries, NFS is there, and Big Mike will give an honest report then buy a set.

Quote:

I wasn't aware Eric posts on here since he never bothers to post in any of the threads that I do or have read

It appears you and I are seperated by a "sarchasm.'

Quote:

...I will not be going and even if I went I wouldn't be anywhere near Ted's demo. I have already stated my disbelief in him giving an honest demo so why bother?

I was just having this conversation with a fundamentalist Muslim the other night. I argued that 'belief' is fungible, but he stated that belief is an immovable object, immune to demonstration of error or any reconsidering one's position.

Thank you for proving him right.

None of you infallible guys ever goes to the Hi Fi shows. Interesting how uncurious people can be about a hobby they claim to hold so dear.

Quote:

About me not attending RMAF, AGAIN send me the plane ticket fare since you seem so upset that I'm not attending
You can read into my non-belief about Ted giving an honest demo all you want as I can read into your willingness to eat up every demo given at RMAF. Are you going by the way and if not why not? I mean your not going yet telling me I should do so speaks volumes

To get BACK on topic by the way......did Stereophile give Ted permission to use Eric's post in the forums as an advertisement for Ted's products?

I will be attending T.H.E./CES in about 9 weeks. Enough overlap that I felt I could miss RMAF.

I've been to pretty much every Stereophile show. I think these events are unbeatable for surveying and auditioning the wide array of products out there!

If you think Ted is jobbing the demo, there would be no reason not to go and give the world the real 'scoop!'

Hard to claim he's cheating the demo if you NEVER check him out.

_

I have no idea if the ad (review) needed Stereophile's blessing, or not.

> So I ask you, is this allowed and who else here thinks it stinks?

In the blurb at the bottom, Source Interlink do not want to own the copyright of user posts but a license to do whatever they like with user posts. Synergistic Research would need permission from the copyright holder to publish the post and since this is almost certainly themselves or someone closely associated/aligned with themselves I would expect them to have it. It is perhaps impolite not to provide a link but they do reference the source and so an interested user could look it up with a small amount effort.

Whether it stinks or not depends on the readers outlook. Personally, I can see no problem with it because in the same way I expect adverts to be misleading in favour of what is being advertised I do not expect anonymous user posts on forums to be agenda free or particularly truthful. As best I can judge (and it can only be a judgement call), marketing through user forums is fairly widespread for audiophile products of this kind.

Very good detective work. It appears you've uncovered a massive conspiracy.

Quote:
The results of the ART demo will be as follows:

JA: Will think he could perceive a difference, but under show conditions, it would be hard to say what this product might do for others. he will report that during the demo, one listener who had been in the room previously will came back in with the demo being done with the bowls now not in place and will spontaneously say, "Hey, where did the bass and imaging go?"

Stephen will hear a small difference and not think of the difference as being as big as some other differences he has heard.

JVS will hear a huge, vast positive, incredible, stupifying difference (especially on female soprano) and wonder how this system might synergize with those mystery plug in devices that were the hit of last year's show.

Now that's funny! :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Synergisit...er, I mean Stereophile
(hope David L, doesn't notice this dead giveaway re: the conspiracy)

Quote:

Quote:
The results of the ART demo will be as follows:

JA: Will think he could perceive a difference, but under show conditions, it would be hard to say what this product might do for others. he will report that during the demo, one listener who had been in the room previously will came back in with the demo being done with the bowls now not in place and will spontaneously say, "Hey, where did the bass and imaging go?"

Stephen will hear a small difference and not think of the difference as being as big as some other differences he has heard.

JVS will hear a huge, vast positive, incredible, stupifying difference (especially on female soprano) and wonder how this system might synergize with those mystery plug in devices that were the hit of last year's show.

Now that's funny! :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Synergisit...er, I mean Stereophile
(hope David L, doesn't notice this dead giveaway re: the conspiracy)

Oh my God. And I hope no one else notices that Buddha teleported his way into my brain, and read my latest assessment of the ART system before I had time to commit it to print. I'm going to have to consult a thesaurus to come up with alternate adjectives to describe my indescribable amazement.

he of bug-eyed wonder

Quote:

Quote:

John Atkinson
Editor, Synergisit...er, I mean Stereophile
(hope David L, doesn't notice this dead giveaway re: the conspiracy)

As usual you avoid the subject and make "funnies" I presume then that Ted had permission to use Eric's "review" as an advert? If so this speaks volumes of Stereophiles ethics or lack there of. Still no comment?

Dude, time to lose the boner.

Quote:

Quote:

Dude, time to lose the boner.

You mean like the boner you had concerning May Belt a few months back?
I'm just trying to get an HONEST answer here but hey we all know that's next to impossible when dealing with the Slippery Stereophile Crew

No, go after Eric or Ted all you like, but this is not a Stereophile "issue."

Quote:
I presume then that Ted had permission to use Eric's "review" as an advert? If so this speaks volumes of Stereophiles ethics or lack there of.

If ethics is a concern, may I suggest that high-end audio may not be the best hobby for you? The business has become so corrupt and fraudulent that you'd be better off seeking good sound in pro audio circles. I did, and I'm very glad to have done so.

> I presume then that Ted had permission to use Eric's "review" as an advert?

That is answered here:

http://privacy.sourceinterlinkmedia.com/terms.html

> If so this speaks volumes of Stereophiles ethics or lack there of.

Their parent company has made the rules clear and since the content is not generated by Stereophile it has little to do with them. They have the option to delete the post but, I suspect, lack any solid evidence about the identity of the author and so have not done so. This probably does say something about ethics. Is "Eric" the only to have exploited it? Is deleting posts they do not like much a better option?

The fact that Synergistic Research has linked to the review by "Eric" is interesting and amusing. Thanks for posting it but it is hard to see it as something to get worked up about.

Quote:

Quote:
I presume then that Ted had permission to use Eric's "review" as an advert? If so this speaks volumes of Stereophiles ethics or lack there of.

If ethics is a concern, may I suggest that high-end audio may not be the best hobby for you? The business has become so corrupt and fraudulent that you'd be better off seeking good sound in pro audio circles. I did, and I'm very glad to have done so.

Something in particular that drove you to pro audio? Any examples of corruption or fraud from personal experience you can share or just expressing a general feeling? Share, share...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I presume then that Ted had permission to use Eric's "review" as an advert? If so this speaks volumes of Stereophiles ethics or lack there of.

If ethics is a concern, may I suggest that high-end audio may not be the best hobby for you? The business has become so corrupt and fraudulent that you'd be better off seeking good sound in pro audio circles. I did, and I'm very glad to have done so.

True that

There are a few companies that manage to straddle both the professional and high-end markets without compromising their principals . Manley Labs/Langevin & JBL come to mind.

Quote:

Thank you Buddha for speaking for Stereophile since JA has decided to ignore it. You should get a paycheck each week for being a forum moderator

Ted, you miserable hump. Thanks for spreading the joy.

Quote:
If ethics is a concern, may I suggest that high-end audio may not be the best hobby for you? The business has become so corrupt and fraudulent that you'd be better off seeking good sound in pro audio circles.

Corrupt and fraudulent in the sense of breaking the laws of the land? Or a legal sort of corrupt and fraudulent?

Quote:
Ted Denney's and Geoff's products are a good example of what he meant no doubt. Also the use of "audiophile terms" like "airy", "transparent" "rhythm and pace" "blacker backgrounds", etc,instead of doing any real measurements paints the high end as being fraudulent, lazy and corrupt. Is it any wonder there is so select and small a number of people that even bother to post on here? For a magazine that claims a high readership, these forums are woefully deserted comparatively.

Most forums that hang off the end of Hi-Fi magazines are woefully deserted. Have a look at Hi-Fi Choice forum.
I'd like to know which measurements are going to tell us a component will guarantee us performance that is "airy", "transparent" have "rhythm and pace" and "blacker backgrounds". OK, some might claim signal to noise ratio measurements provide us with the promise of "blacker background" but that hasn't been my experience. In the long run though relying on anyone's subjective vocabulary, even Harry Pearson's systematic one, is no substitute for hearing a component with your own ears. Reading nothing but measurements sure won't tell you the whole truth.
In the end it's all down to that old clich

Quote:
I'd like to know which measurements are going to tell us a component will guarantee us performance that is "airy", "transparent" have "rhythm and pace" and "blacker backgrounds".

For "rhythm and pace," see Martin Colloms' and Peter van Willenswaard's comments at http://www.stereophile.com/reference/23 .

For other subjective terms and how they are used, see J. Gordon Holt's glossary at http://www.stereophile.com/j_gordon_holt/50 .

Spent some time in the Synergistic room at RMAF; will report my reaction in the on-line show report, probably on Wednesday.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Well I did take a look at the glossary (thanks for linking it JA) and I found it very interesting and useful, maybe more should do so as well.
David, you did spend time going through it before criticising?

Cheers
Orb

> Ted Denney's and Geoff's products are a good example of what he meant no doubt.

No doubt. But my question was about whether you considered this to be illegal fraud and corruption, perhaps what one would normally expect from the term, or legal fraud and corruption.

> Also the use of "audiophile terms" like "airy", "transparent" "rhythm and pace" "blacker backgrounds",
> etc,instead of doing any real measurements paints the high end as being fraudulent, lazy and corrupt.

I am not sure I see the connection with the use of terms that have little to no physical meaning (although I would perhaps dispute "airy" when applied to a loudspeaker) and fraudulent, lazy and corrupt.

My favourite audiophile word is "musicality".

> Is it any wonder there is so select and small a number of people that even bother to post on here?

Stereophile's forum was late to the party, inevitably has a commercial slant and, unfortunately, has more than one fairly unpleasant regular poster. If I was, say, an Audio Asylum regular I would expect it to put me off a bit. Of course, there are vast numbers of audiophile forums out there and many of them have less posts then this one.

> Now if anyone cares to dispute what I just said please feel free to show me the errors of my ways.

I would expect that Stereophile do mind but are not in a position to do much about it without solid evidence rather than suspicions. The users own the copyright to their posts and so I expect it is only "Eric" that could do something in a legal sense about his post being used elsewhere against his wishes.

my only problem is that there still has not been a 3rd party oversight/testing session. That bugs me as we were told we would have one long ago. I don't see this as a fault of JA or Stereophile...I do, however, suspect that Ted knows his products "expectations" will crumble under the weight of scientific scrutiny. I wouldn't be surprised a bit if he were somehow purposefully causing these delays..

JA, please keep pushing for this 3rd party review!!

Quote:

Hear ye hear he! Come one and all and post false "reviews" ye of little morals then copy and paste said "reviews" and use them for your own personal advertising purposes. Stereophile won't mind!In fact they will help you out by not commenting on the infraction at all. Heck they will even send their head cheese JA to your demo for further advertising help free of charge. No need to worry about having your product "tested" so don't sweat having the truth revealed. Now if anyone cares to dispute what I just said please feel free to show me the errors of my ways.

Yet, here YOU are.

How do you 'splain that?

Stereophile is somehow pimping for Ted, while not eliminating you claiming they are pimping for Ted.

I'm thinking you've become the Christine O'Donnel of the forum!

Now, why shouldn't JA attend a demo of Ted's bowls? Why should he not report his listening impressions?

Quote:

"Note To Manufacturers

The Stereophile forum is not to be used by manufacturers as a pulpit to promote their products or discredit the products of others.

Manufacturers should reveal themselves as manufacturers with every post made

I don't know what "bowls" are being talked about & it doesn't matter. What I don't understand is all of you who have such major issues with Stereophile, the "High End" & this forum; what are you doing here?! Really!! Why keep coming back & wasting your time here?
I'm not talking about those of us who like the mag & this forum, but disagree sometimes. I mean those who seem to have a disdain for all of this; why are you here & what do you care? If JA & crew are so dishonest or whatever, why bother?
To me, your all a pain in the ass!!

Exactly.

I third this motion.

Maybe if they would get more aquainted with a "different" kind of bowl, and actually listened to some music they wouldn't be so obsessed with trivialities.

Quote:
I third this motion.

Maybe if they would get more aquainted with a "different" kind of bowl, and actually listened to some music they wouldn't be so obsessed with trivialities.

LOL!

I honestly don't mind the disagreeing, it's the implication that JA would do anything underhanded that gets me scratching my head.

I remember when JA came on board, and he has not done one thing, ever, to my recollection, that would make me question his ethics.

His sanity, maybe.....

I'm at this forum because I feel a great deal of loyalty to the magazine that has been the beating heart of the print portion of my hobby for so long, it's sad.

So, go after the bowls all you like, but the insinuation that JA is up to no good is bogus.

First, they'd want to see test results. Charts and graphs. Controlled studies with a placebo herb. Sphincter diameter before and after.

Quote:
First, they'd want to see test results. Charts and graphs. Controlled studies with a placebo herb. Sphincter diameter before and after.

freakin hilarious good one.

Quote:

Quote:
I third this motion.

Maybe if they would get more aquainted with a "different" kind of bowl, and actually listened to some music they wouldn't be so obsessed with trivialities.

LOL!

I honestly don't mind the disagreeing, it's the implication that JA would do anything underhanded that gets me scratching my head.

I remember when JA came on board, and he has not done one thing, ever, to my recollection, that would make me question his ethics.

His sanity, maybe.....

I'm at this forum because I feel a great deal of loyalty to the magazine that has been the beating heart of the print portion of my hobby for so long, it's sad.

So, go after the bowls all you like, but the insinuation that JA is up to no good is bogus.

I agree 1000%

Look from what I've seen going all the way back to my first subscription in 1994, these guys here at Stereophile have worked thier asses off trying to review as much gear as possible and provide as much info as possible.

Even Scull was hilarious to read. Even if you didn't like him, he was still a helluva writer.

p.s. now can I have that free subscription? lol!...just joking

Mark

Quote:

Won't happen and never will. JA has no interest or "time" in doing REAL tests but he can find the time to go to a "demo" controlled By Ted Denney

Yeah, they take about the same amount of time and effort.

He also can find the time to defend Ted on the forums YET not discuss Ted using "Eric's review"

This is obviously a larger part of your life than his, yet you refuse a money back audition or any invitation to audition the product. Suspicious. JA is to be your minion because you are too lazy to take no fiscal risk and try the product. Makes sense.

...and then the "faithful" rally to JA's defense like good little boys

If I didn't like JA's methods or ethics, I wouldn't be here.

Hey if you all want to blindly accept what JA does as the gospel then knock yourselves out.

Not gospel, just not unethical.

Teddy Ray if you read back in this thread, JA blames ME as the reason the mystery engineer backed out of testing the bowls. Yep, the innovators out there better watch out because I have the power to put the fear into anyone doing tests and publishing their opinion. Well I for one DO blame JA and Stereophile for dropping the ball on this but I suppose accountability isn't one of JA's attributes.

How big a part of the Hi Fi market do you think we are talkin' here? Maybe you should go into the witless protection program.

Quote:
Buddah it's obvious you're a kiss ass so your replies are not surprising
Hey you never sent me airfare to go to the RMAF and now I'm betting you won't lend me $3000 to audition Ted's bowls either Gosh what a cheapskate you are.
JA had 2 YEARS to test bowls that would take MAYBE 30 minutes at do any test you can think of yet FAILED to do so and you say it's my fault for not coughing up the dough and listening myself You are the witless one me thinks

Dude, put 'em on your Visa, audition them, then get a refund.

No cost to you.

You do have some plastic, yes?

Travel to the shows is an investment, dude. And fun. You should go hear the stuff you deplore.

> As Eric Arjes is not Ted Denney, your point is moot.

May I ask what has lead you to this conclusion?

> I honestly don't mind the disagreeing, it's the implication that JA would do anything underhanded that
> gets me scratching my head.

I think it may come down to what you and David mean by underhanded. As editor of Stereophile I think most would agree that he serves that interest well. David seems to be getting upset because he does not serve what might broadly call a scientific interest well (i.e. what you were taught at school and what you would see in a scientific/technical publication). Since the two interests are not always well aligned by simply doing his job JA may be seen to be underhanded by the those with a non-audiophile (possibly anti-audiophile) set of beliefs.