Hi Geoff

I would like to use this quote by you from time to time if it's ok.

geoff said

"It's all a Big Mystery. That's why almost every single thread not only here on Stereophile but on ALL forums is contentious, everyone has his own theory about nearly everything. We don't even understand how electricity works. And when it comes to tiny little acoustic bowl resonators, intelligent chips, clever clocks, constrained layer damping, Shakti Stones, Mpingo discs, Morphic Fields, the Teleportation Tweak, Schumann frequency generators, rainbow foil, Lessloss Blackbody, SteinMusic Harminizer, wire directionality, cryogenics, mineral crystals, the color purple, the color orange, how CDs work, quantum mechanics, vibration isolation, the difference between magnetic fields and electromagnetic fields we have more, uh, Mystery."

mg

I think this is one of the huge differences between You & May compared to myself and the folks I have worked with and continue to. This is not a flame toward you in any way, simply an interest in the difference between some of our approaches to audio. I for example don't look at any of these as a mystery at all, and this can be summed up in the differences between theory and practical application.

I find it interesting that you & May find your work as hypothesis driven and not actual, and would like to get to know why the both of you take this approach in your designing, thought and personal listening.

All back and forths aside, in reading the both of you over these past two years the questions in my mind about your listening habbits and research kept surfacing with me and others. It did indeed seem like you were not doing the hobby but more theorizing what you thought the hobby might be as in one big mystery that you have just spoken to.

I see the hobby and music in general as 180 degrees from this. For someone like myself it falls into two positions, Random or Organized, and calling it a mystery would imply that there is no structure or order to music. Is this your positions? If so no wonder you take the stands you do.

Why do you believe there is no structure to music, if this is your point of view?

The understanding of both you and May has come into much light over the last few days, and I appreciate the more open responses.

thanks

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Yep, we have a pretty healthy team going on, and the thing that I like is that I get to stay in my world of doing. I know I make fun of the theory side but that's just in an attempt to keep it from getting too heavy, I really do (don't tell anyone) enjoy reading good theory as an after math sort of thing, but don't let it step into my world. I can't, cause I have to enter a project with a very clear and un-bias mindset. I can't run into questions un-answered. My clients count on me for specifics. How the after story un-folds for different folks depends on their backgrounds and own experiences so I try to let that be what it is on it's own merits, and try not to let it sidetrack me.

I find in audio that every system is extremely unique unto itself, because of all the variables involved. In my opinion all the forces are at work, and any part of nature can step in and take music for a ride at will. That may not be the fine lines of spliting hairs that others live by, but it certainly fits when faced with what some would consider the unusual. So in my line of work, there is no un-known past death. The mysteries of man dwell within the minds of man. The laying on of hands is where we experience the truth. The rest may be intelligent words, but they follow the proof if the goal is practical application.

So since we have the crowd we do on this forum, I hope I don't offend when I'm making statements I do, not my goal. My goal is to get to the experiencing of at the deepest levels required.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Thanks for that explaination May, but if this is the case why not come from a "real time" doing setting?

Many of your writings and such, as one pointed to lately, start with hypotheticals. When writing in the theory only hypothesis mode, the on looker paints you on the talking side only. A scientist's best foot forward is his lab work in real time and accounts. Proof is in the doing, and look at your comments over the last two years about the "doing". Page after page of those asking you to be a little more on the doing side, both you and geoff, and it was like pulling teeth, or no teeth at all to pull. Now we see you appear in a defense of the doing.

I hope this is the starting of the show to your tell.

Second point

In the cases of you doing, why and how have you come to the conclusions of "IF's", Mysteries", "Controversy", "Questions un-answered" and "I don't knows". This to me as a doer points to the lack of successful doing. In our practical applications, we have found that there is no mystery, and yet geoff is here screaming "all is mystery". We can only conclude based on your own words thus far that you and geoff have been un-successful in finding the answers, and on top of this telling others there are no answers.

This May is the opposite from our findings, and yet makes you yell at us for claiming we have found answers, when we are only stating the truth.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

I want to thank you as well Ron. I do enjoy reading the thoughts and approaches of others. If there were only 72 hrs in a day. I find it helpful that someone can be looking at the same things yet with a completely different mindset. This is why I like to get past the potential flame stuff that might happen. I'm kind of like a get past the ego stuff (even if it is fun) and get to the meat of the thoughts. I don't care who is right or wrong cause I have to do what I do period, and I like to do it with a clear mind. There's the space, the parts and my willingness to learn from the experience. No room for assuming when I am in that mode. A great practice I learned from being on the road and on studio time. I, as I said, do like looking at the theories but try to look at them as coming from someones own study on the topic. I can try my best to relate, and appreciate how great their mind is, but it's not until my practice comes in, before I can put those words in my personal knowledge vault.

being a student is a marvelous thing

I'll go take a look at the thread.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoff says

"When you are working in new areas as I do, the new frontier, advanced audio concepts, there are sometimes no text books, no theory and certainly no applications that explains or substantiates the theory. Things can Get a little rough, I'll tell ya. There is no format, no roadmap, you're out there on your own, on a tightrope with no net. Sometimes operating in unknown and uncharted territory can take a very long time to come up with something tangible or something that actually works."

mg

based on what you have said

This of course is the reason we have on many occasions asked about your listening test lab and equipment used. And the question begs, if you haven't had an in-room system in over eight years how could you have designed these products?

You have refered to an in-room system that you replaced with a headphone system, to then replace with a sony portable cassette player. You mentioned a long time ago using Quads in a system. Is this the extent of your testing systems?

Could you give us a timeline of your products and associated equipment used, please? So far things have not lined up and reading through your threads and comments it's hard to get a sense of what you did both successful and not, and how you moved (and why) from one system and set of testing to the next.

I think a lot of the doubt that people have in you is because of the blurry lines of both your testing and your accounts. I think if these could somehow be put in a timeline and the events themselves it would go a long way to clear up a lot of questions.

Also this would be good for May to supply. Giving product names doesn't point to advanced concepts, the lab work however gives people an opportunity to see the level of skill put into the designing.

Just to recap, the name of the thread is "Audio Mystery How & Why". In order to see where the Mystery, How and Why are and were it's important to look at the products and concepts you and May mention in reqards to their practical applications. No hypotheticals, but actual lab work and research.

"truth is found in the doing" M. Green

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Hi geoff

This is probably why you have so many others in the hobby respond to you the way they do, and why this hobby according to your own words "It's all a Big Mystery" ring true for you and May.

I really don't think it is a mystery at all for those of us who explore the events.

geoff says

"I'm quite sure I've already explained myself sufficiently over the course of the past year."

mg

What I have read is you gave up in-room listening 8 years ago, replaced this with a high end headphone system, which you said didn't have the soundstage that the in-room system did. Then you got rid of the high end headphone setup and went to a portable Sony cassette player and started picking up used store bought tapes. After, you stated that the portables were not serious but more to prove a point, but yet we have no moving on from the portables.

This is your account according to you that covers the last 8 years. No 3rd degree just asking what everyone else does about how you come to the comments about advanced concepts you do.

No need for you to start flaming. It's just as you present a post saying many things like "Gee, portable Sony Walkmans are looking like a pretty good idea to me." and not more than a month ago you saying you were not serious about these being any kind of reference, you can see why listeners would question you. We read you saying you have designed things over the last couple of years but there is no listening tests equipment any where around.

This to us looks like you are just pulling our ears according to you, certainly our legs, and more than likely these mystery advanced concepts are a joke as well. Based on what we see, anyone could go to any hobby shop, and create "advanced concepts" if they have the will to shout them into existance, and flame all others who ask questions about them. If you have not done a lab and you say these are mind over matter tweaks anyway, where is the Why & How & the Mystery are really just you and May's mystery. Create a mystery and then sell it, without ever giving the why & how outside of hypotheticals, flaming and general internet trolling practices is not legit for the science community. Maybe for loosely mod forums, but not for any real proof settings.

Now May speaks up and says she and Peter are doing. Still no evidence of a listening lab, but again shouting that the mystery is real and there are no answers. Shouting, that others claim to be the answer when they haven't, or shouting others claim that their answer is "THE" answer in an attempt to take the focus off of the both of you.

Again I challenge you two to support your claims in a practical application way conducted by yourselves to show how there are no answers to your advanced concepts.

By the both of your writings it seems your advanced concepts are really your advanced (on purpose) mystery, creating a mystery around products that have no mystery at all. It's your pictures to paint but lets hope you will do better than

"No reason for the third degree, McGee. I'm quite sure I've already explained myself sufficiently over the course of the past year. If you wish to pretend there is something rotten in Denmark that would be your problem. Have a nice day and try to lay off the sauce."

I see absoluting no attempt on May and Geoff's part to even try to explain and test these concepts on any level of scientific practical applications past claims of doing so, in regards to the how & why. Instead what I see and read are people trying to create mystery when there is none. The product is really the selling of the mystery.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Sorry geoff, but we don't see hypothesis: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence, as being an explaination. We do see you trolling audio forums and pointing to explainations that others keep asking you questions about, with you giving flaming responses to, but that's about as much as you have supplied, and again is probably why your own designs are nothing more than "a mystery" to you, according to your own words.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

It appears geoff just trolled himself.

As geoff is stating his designing is based on theory, not a problem with this camp (they are as expected), however this is not proof of anything and is commonly known as "IF" science. It's a basic science spin that is taught in first year basic theory building. A scientific theory may be rejected or modified if it does not fit empirical findings.

If we look at the chart geoff found and posted you will see where the theory is repeatedly thrown back into the process (scientific spin cycle). It's interesting still because it's a fairly accurate description of both geoff's and May's basis of design and explaination.

This is pretty much my thinking about their products and explainations so I'm glad that geoff has confirmed that their designing is based on theory building (hypothetical) and not practical application. It's pretty much keep throwing at the wall till something sticks, or at least the possibility of potential, sells the idea.

So yes, I would say based on what I have seen and read this is very much an accurate chart for geoff and May.

What's surprising to me is that geoff chooses such a basic formula, to attempt to validate their "advanced concepts", when we all know that "advanced concepts" are treated with extreme testing and extensive lab work, and is always confirmed by 3rd party scientific research that is certified by one or more scientific accreditation programs. Such as my Tunable Room design has scientific accreditation from Yale.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

They say proof is in the pudding and one of the reasons geoff is questioned so much can be summed up in this one example.

Geoff spends several days joining in a conversation about the Schumann Resonances as a loud opponent to anyone standing in the way of his trolling, only to finally admit "First of all I never said I listened to the Schumann frequency generator. But I ALWAYS thought the idea was interesting."

geoff says "It's all a Big Mystery" well I guess if your only talking it is all a mystery to you

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Here's the link to the referenced thread.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/schumann-resonances

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Can I ask you a question geoff, do you drink and do meds?

Many of your flames are based on alcohol and drugs. I've had at least 5 members PM me saying they believe you suffer from drinking and drugs yourself because of the many references to.

Hey, it's your own business, but when you make this such a big part of your posts in the form of flames, wars and baits it ends up pointing to you yourself having a problem with substance abuse and other issues geoff.

As we have said in the past, geoff kait is more a mudd puddle that is too wide to miss. I wouldn't call this a hardon, but then again geoff is in his 80's, so maybe drinking, drugs, oldman hardons, 1st grade picture posting, all out anger and falsehoods and a portable cassette player as his reference in the hobby, all fits together.

One statement though that we find rings true more often than not is when geoff says of himself "I'm probably not the right person to ask".

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

note this isn't in response to the above post, just some general thoughts

I find it hard to judge without the experience, probably because I didn't have a life outside of some sort of lab (practical application) throughout my audio journey. So, for me the idea of basing audio theory ahead of the doing is out to lunch, and that's being nice about it.

I look at it like this. Lets say we set a book (computer) schooled engineer into a hall and tell him to voice it for this evenings concert. He has a set of EQ's in front of him and different tools to use that do some types of auto correct, and effects. The hall begins to fill up and he has a malfunction with his computer right before the event begins. Now this guy is forced to go to a manual setting and do the hall by ear as the performance is happening in real time. At this point if he has only depended on knowing his computer, this concert might as well be over. A matter of tools and experience.

This example can be broken down into any part of the audio performance or chain. When it comes to a sport like audio, everytime a new piece of recorded material comes on it's like the engineer trying to run that concert. Our brains are going to fall back on a mixture of learning by book and learning by real time experience. There are many people who are great theorist who can't turn a nob to save their life. Likewise there are many who can crank it up not understanding the physics behind gain and wonder why the volume only serves to confuse. I deal with this everyday all day, where a person is asking for answers to a question as if there is an audio one size fits all miracle cure. The hobby is full of these cures as our shelves are lined with them.

the story of stores

We have two stores in a town where one is selling home audio and the other musical instruments, but sadly this hobby has not made the connection and keeps trying to fit their mindset and belief system into an equation that doesn't work. We can walk into the music store and tune those instruments into pitch, and yet walk down a few doors and sit there wondering why the audio system doesn't sound right. You can hear the stereo system is obviously out of pitch (tune), but the audio store has been programed for plug & play and not the variables of audio. The sales person, fellow audiophiles and theorist will sit there and ponder and or judge without even once considering going back to that music store and making the connection of the method of tuning. In one store tuning is to be expected as common sense and idiotic to think other wise, but in the audio store it comes down to good or bad with no understanding of how the audio code really works. No understanding because of one simple truth to science, proof is in the doing. We buy, and like for a while, then start to question the sound, but before we go walk into the instrument store we pick up our audio journal and put our faith once again in marketing. It's a cycle of brands, reviews and money with the same results every time. We hear something different, focus on it for a while, then the cycle kicks in all over again. We will do almost anything that prevents us from going into that music store, because in our minds we're sure the circuit will out perform the doing, or the audio myth/legend will mysteriously come to life.

but lets look at this story

Anyone with an imagination can write a book based on theories, mtyhs, hypothesis, their reputation and a few limited testing results, absolutely anyone. A spin can be made for any type of mystery anyone wants to make. As well getting someone to hear a difference in audio as in the case of a reviewer or hobbyist, is as easy as making a change, any change in sound. People love talking about audio tradeoffs. But while all this building of stories is going on, that music store with those instruments continues to hold the answers to this industry and hobby.

No mystery, just one simple truth that has been around forever, and so obvious almost all completely overlook it until the day it is recognized. And when that gold is claimed a jewel we will see everyone and their brother come running as if tuning was always a part of the hobby.

And here's the most interesting part of all. This industry has been dancing around this topic ever since it's beginning, and is still afraid to pick up that tool and tune.

The only mystery in this hobby is ego.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

As we have been looking into why May & geoff are on almost every thread that has to do with the actual doing of the hobby, we are still waiting for the actual "do".

Geoff now supports the fact that his products are only hypothetical, but we're still waiting on May to show us that she and Peter have been active in the "doing" beyond her telling us she is.

How hard is it, within a hobby of doing, to do the show part of the tell? In the case of May & geoff this has indeed been a huge mystery.

Maybe the mystery they are promoting is nothing more than their own marketing scheme: a large-scale systematic plan or arrangement for attaining some particular object or putting a particular idea into effect. It has worked like this.

May came into the picture asking me a question as a bait for her long campaign, so she may be perceived as relevant to the topics. She found her que in saying "michael says he is THE answer" which in fact never was the case, and even though several people confirmed michael had never said this it was her tool to stay in the game. There have been over 10 times I have explained that I am not the answer, but make tools to help people find their answer. The trolling from her still continues, as if I and all the other people who have told her this is not the case, were never here.

In geoff's case it is far more diabolical, as his scheme involves creating a past that was never there, and building a history of flames and internet trolling. To geoff the troll itself is far more important to keep alive than his own credibility and knowledge. Geoff referes to the trolling itself as proof. Geoff creates the troll topic, and then quickly engages in a series of internet flaming to keep himself relevant. When challenged he simply points to the length of the trolled topic as his proof even though that topic isn't about the topic much at all but geoff's internet trolling techniques. He figures that his victims are never going to take the time to look into his falsehood and all he needs to do is keep making them up.

All of this of course comes to an end, after they are long gone from the memory books, and all of us will move onto far more practical approaches to the hobby, if we haven't already.

As far as me, I simply go down on their list of bad guys who have taken the time to show them for who they are. They're of no particular interest of mine, but just happens that they have chosen me as one of their piggie backs to ride on until I give them no attention. How long will they continue this spin depends on my own personal relevance in the hobby.

Be sure though folks that there are no audio mysteries out there that are beyond answers, and this hobby isn't as stupid and gullible as geoff and may are trying to make it look. You as a listener can go as far as you wish and honestly there's no end to the exploration of music. There's no one size fits all and no place or road map that says "stop". The methods of listening are as vast as you yourself want to make them. It's a huge variable hobby and anytime someone puts the absolutes to it be sure it's only because they themselves have decided to stop and take a look, from their point of view, it has nothing to do with how far you decide to go.

here's what I wish for both May & Geoff

Come join the hobby and let it be what it is. Let your own opinions ring, for sure, but take down the spins and quit saying others are trying to spin you, cause this is not what this hobby and lifestyle is about. I know many have asked before, but that's all anyone can do. Let your voices be heard for what they are and not what you think others should think they are. Voodoo doll avatars, serpent images and science fiction comics should be view at for what they are and you two should accept the fact that your making these images about you and noone else. Don't paint others in the same light that you view yourselves and expect us to not notice. We didn't paint your backgrounds and reputations you have. We haven't made up the mysteries, you have.

It's true that the loudest voice is usually heard, but it's also true that we have the option of wearing ear plugs, and that's what many do if your going to shout at them. You can't shout your point into existance, but you can prove your existance as a shouter, fraud, internet troller and someone with a lack of knowledge by your own paint brushes. Your building and have built your own reputations, I would pay attention to what those reputations say.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

First off, let me thank the gentlemen that have pursued the credentials & credibility of geoff kait. The time and effort it takes to get caught up in a trolling spin is exhausting. At the end of the day though, my confidence in my fellow audiophile has been rasied.

The question now is, how to proceed knowing that these threads will be disrupted and trolled. Everyone will need to deal with this in their own way, but as for me it comes down to a matter of practical application. Either geoff can move forward with us as a listener or he will continue to be in question.

I want to specifically thank Ron for putting his expertise on the front line as an open book for all to see so we could learn to view his system and hobby through his eyes and the eyes of not only peers but as fellow listeners.

There are others here who should be noted for being willing to share their hobby with us as a community. Everyones view has value and everyones view deserves respect. At the same time we should be able to judge each others hobby and work on it's merits based in truth and clarity. Two years to take a look at any designers lab, system and real time applications is way too long and in my book raises questions of legitimacy. This hobby is nothing more than one big spin if we allow it to become he said she said. In other words if you come to the ball game at least bring a glove.

However when geoff comes to the ball game with a VooDoo doll as an avatar, a snake as the facebook lead photo, science fiction comics as the art work for his website, flames using 3rd grade picture posting, constant refering to anger use of drugs & drinking, and his relevance being mainly based on internet trolling, it's no wonder he would state "It's all a big mystery". It's also no wonder that he uses a portable cassette player as his audio system.

geoff states

"I have twenty or so new products in the last couple of years. They are not hypothetical."

If there not hoypothetical, than they must be for sony portable sport walkman cassette players, because this is all geoff has for a research lab according to him. They are certainly not for any in-room systems as he has not owned one for over eight years. Again according to geoff himself. So why wouldn't geoff come here and say "it's all a big mystery"? Of course it is to him and his associates.

If someone comes to you and says "I have an in-room tweak" and doesn't have an in-room stereo system, it is hypothetical: made on the basis of limited evidence.

no mystery here, just some old fart painting relevance for himself any way he can

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

May says

"Peter and I probably introduce something new about twice a year. THAT, in my vocabulary, is DOING !!!!"

mg

Show it! We don't need to read anymore of your vocabulary May, we've had quite enough of the talk.

may

"I have told you repeatedly that I prefer not to abuse the courtesy which Stereophile have extended to manufacturers being able to participate in the discussions groups and that I prefer to follow the guidelines (rules for manufacturers) as used by the Audio Asylum chat forum."

mg

Incase you haven't noticed this forum is called Stereophile. AA is not a magazine, May. You see that little thing called gallery at the top of the page. This is where you can put your lab. See that little .com on your website, that's where you can put pics on your lab, and systems. Most companies I know lead with their lab. Even geoffy leads with his portable cassette player. You see May it's not that tough.

may

"I challenge you Michael because I believe that you do not have anything which is so unique that it is SOOOOO imperative that the world of audio MUST BE TOLD and therefore must be given unbridled and non challenging free range access through the medium of the Stereophile Chat Forum, and I also challenge you because whilst constantly pushing YOUR techniques on the Stereophile Forum you actively discourage people from doing anything which could be called ‘fixed’ – when some ‘fixed’ techniques and procedures can be just as important as keeping things variable !!!!!"

mg

OH, so now your the Stereophile moderator, news to me. You know May they only give out so many challenge cards in sports, and you have used yours up. Your not my mom, my teacher, my warden or my peer, so if you wish you talk to me or on the behalf of me, lets do it in the listening room and not on the phile if that's what you wish. In other words SSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHH stop yelling your hurting our delicate ears lol.

see may it's easy

........audio umbrella.........

.....tuning the variables.....

See how nice and neat that works kids. Audio is variable and tuning audio is how we adjust it. You see wasn't that easy class?

may

"Whilst I am taking this opportunity to reply to you, I will reply to other comments of yours all in this one reply."

mg

May, whilst I'm taking the opportunity to read your reply your not saying anything.

may

"What do you really think I do all day ? Sit around waiting for the phone to ring to INVITE me to listen to music ????? You have a very weird idea as to what people do all day – as if I am waiting for an INVITE from someone else so that I can listen to music"

mg

I could care less what you do all day, I'm not your nursing home director. But I can tell you what active listeners who are into the hobby do all day. They listen and post about music, and the community of listeners talk about tuning their systems and recordings.

may

"I don’t NEED an invite !!! I do it naturally and daily !!!!"

mg

Well good for you, here we thought you didn't even have a stereo to listen to. Can't wait till you start sharing your music and system with us. Here you take all this effort coming here and very rarely ever talk about what you and your oldman are up to. Glad to see you turn the corner big Sis now maybe we can talk about stereos and music. Loosen up there ole gal, go smoke some weed with your buddy geoff and flick the switch. I'm sure he has an extra set of earphones. But whilst you come up here so uptight and say "I don’t NEED an invite !!! I do it naturally and daily !!!!" it sounds more like a prune juice convention. Lighten up there woman, your talken to a music biz guy not a visit for the ole yearly check up.

may

"Here we go again, implying you are the only one who ‘cares’. You really are arrogant."

mg

mg didn't imply anything other than if you and geoff ever want to join in the fun the door is wide open. Now if you take my caring for arrogance noone can stop you, but you truly do come off as two old biddies stuck in their way. your like "I said fixed dag-nabbit", "and you'd better be listening". I mean poor old geoff sounds like he wants to take it to the streets sometimes, and your so full of ex-school teacher-i-tis your like the old grandma swingin her cane. Your like "if I say it's outside the umbrella than bi-God it's outside the umbrella" and we're like "OK grannie whatever you say".

I mean May, do you really think anyone cares what umbrella "fixed" is under? You act like it's a hair-do that can't get wet. Your not going to remove "fixed" from "physics" no matter what you do.

may

"Not running for any hills. I have explained that we are DOING, constantly, and WHY I don’t post such."

mg

Well that's just stupid May. Why come to a forum to not post. "WHY I don't post such", really? And why are you here again? Oh, your here on a post driven forum, not to post, oh we get it now, "it's all one big mystery". Oh, you don't post your system and activities because it's a mystery, we get it now. "gather around children lets play hypothetical stereo".

The last part of what your saying is just stupid. I'd like to be more polite about it, but when I am and do you turn it into something it isn't so why bother. Stupid is good enough and just as accurate.

If you've got something to show, show it, but stop wasting our time.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

As we have seen over the last 2 weeks, the mystery spinners have pretty much spun. Geoff lays in his rubble of provoking, and May still has not been able to come out of her talk no walk.

Audiophiles are moving on from both of these mystery makers and on to practical applications within our hobby. Will the spins of both May & geoff continue? I'm sure they will according to their past years of spins being the same as their current audio trolling, but at least we have arrived at a place of certainty and that's good for everyone.

The certainty is this, words are part of the equation but if these words can not be demonstrated and repeated, they are simply not enough to bring anyone into an accredited status. As the audiophile forums have attested to, May & geoff are suspect for good reason. They openly and repeatedly express (even shout) that audio to them "is a mystery", and that we should embrace this as truth. We should embrace this as truth without ever seeing a lab or system of theirs. We should base the mystery without geoff, for example, not being able to prove something as simple as him ever writing his claimed undergrad thesis of 50 years ago. Geoff spent more time writing about how it exist, than most people do writing a thesis itself. Geoff pointed us to his specific title of the thesis as a "definitive document" then changed the title of this 50 year old writing that he uses as his claim to credibility.

For well over 15 years the industry has been wittnessing the same mystery talk from May & geoff and have been given every opportunity to give proof, yet still after all this time there has never been a lab facility, or reference audio system produced. It's been all talk about what is and no show of what is. Everytime the show is brought up they become hostile, shouting at others as can be referenced on these threads. Their troll is to be recognized without being authorized. They try to pull expert authorization out of thin air, as if the practical side is simply to be overlooked. In their minds the practice of start a fight with an expert makes them a peer with that expert. It's nothing more than riding coattails of relevance to appear relevant.

Where are these mysteries, is as easy to sum up as, why would geoff kait change the title of his 50 year old thesis, why would geoff claim to design audio products without an audio system, why would geoff even try to use a thesis that has nothing to do with audio to build credibility in audio. Why would geoff claimed to be an open book by trying to hide almost all of his life?

No mysteries here, just two folks trying to make a living off of themselves looking mysterious with pictures of snakes, voodoo dolls, old science fiction comics, four legged pet trick tweaks and lots and loads of internet trolling, fights and spinning.

The mystery is why are they even here? Why not post on believe it or not forums? Why promote http://www.bing.com/search?q=Geoff+KAIT+Fraud&FORM=QSRE1 over the hobby of listening to music? Why say "it's all a mystery"?

No thanks May & geoff, this has nothing to do with audio.

Let me prove my point with the simplist of questions for all to see.

Geoff, what is your birth date?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

I'm very pleased to see Ron (not a troll) give the fairest of fair opportunities to geoff kait. Ron being a scientist and audio explorer is exactly what this forum needs to round out these pages and I hope this leads to more people feeling they can come here and experience proper forum respect and etiquette.

Also great to see JA peek in and making comments in response to Ron.

As ChrisS has pointed out, high end audio forums should rise above the trolling, and when the troll attacks do happen, the trolls should be put squarely in their place. Community, respect, opinions, info and above all music should be what rules these pages.

As for geoff kait, being honest and "an open book" is not in his makeup, but his spins have been spun and he has been exposed for who and what he is. This particular thread should serve well as the answer to May & geoff's audio "mystery". Anyone who can't even answer the most basic of basic questions that everyone is asks when ever getting involved in almost any daily informative situation "what is your birthdate", and turns this into an internet troll (along with any other Q&A's), shows us that any answers given by geoff should be treated with the same inquiry.

I do regret that May Belt has linked herself so closely with Geoff Kait and his practices, but this is hers and Peter Belt's choice to make. As an on looker of only two years Peter Belt, May Belt & Geoff Kait have failed the basic requirements of proof and scientific research needed to take their theories from hypothesis to solid scientific evidence.

Saying this, the door of proof is always open, but it is not done through internet trolling and a lack of empirical evidence teamed with practical application.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/