There are those who persist in buying the one true head of John the Baptist, too.

After 2,000 years, you'd think they'd learn.

Audiophiles are only 1,981 years behind idiot relic shoppers.

After thirty years, you'd think some of this bullshit would have leaked out of audio into actual utility, but no.

So long as there are charlatans who persist in confusing a home freezer with cryogenic treatment, there shall be no credibility for the snakes in the audio grass, May.

Couldn't satisfy the ego by posting a reply on the other thread, I see.

As to the "why" and "how." You first! Spare us the crap morphic resonance fakery, please.

For most, the "why" is cash, and the how is "alfalfa in, bullshit out."

I'm sure P.T. Kait will be along shortly....

Despite all your obfuscations, May, you can't escape the fact that without a DBT all your so called evidence may simply be the result of expectation bias.

 So pretty much everything you say falls into the category of blah blah blah.

You might want to consider that the reason some people won't "discuss seriously" with you is because ,so far, you have had nothing serious to say.

...the last resot of the naysayer fraidy cats.

“Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only set their minds upon it, and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish to accomplish, and the thing is easily done.”  - PT Barnum

If I shoot at the sun I may hit a star"  - PT Barnum

I don' want to set the workl on fire, I jus ant to satrt a flame in a few hearts."  Ed "Kookie" Burns

GC Kait

Macvhina Dynamica

Do those Mumbo-Jumbo magic devices always cost scores of times more than their cost of production...

I suspect the chance of simple scams rises with the cost of the device...

"There's a dufus windbag born every minute." - old audiophile axiom

:-)

GC Kait
Machina Dynamica

It would seem that if we accept much of what's advertised as "improvements", that absolutely everything affects the sounds we hear.  "Dear, can you, possibly, blow on both speaker cables at the same time?"

One example: $35 for a pair of Cardas input jack caps?  Even if they work, I've lost respect for those who royally rip-off their customers.  Others may admire the same treachery.  I refuse to buy anything from those who make good equipment if they also wade in the waters of unreasonable profit.

"Bringing the cost of the devices into the discussion is a red herring.   The COST of anything only comes into the equation at the very end, when the final decision has to be made whether to purchase something or not."

Yet I cannot think of a single one of these magic devices that are a really (as in cost to effect and cost of construction) cost effective. Should not some of these things be cost efective and have results that it does not take golden ears (and a lot of Cabernet Sauvignon) to hear?

Must they always be $50 in parts an $1000 in price?

I view this like I do Congressional Bills or Court Decisions...the bigger they are the more fraught with problems and flim flam.

I agree that these things might have an effect that can be heard, but most do not and all cost vastly more than the alleged change in the sound could possibly warrant.

As we are discussing mumbo jumbo effects and magic, we need to note all the efects including evil spirits and the odd talisman.

"Yet I cannot think of a single one of these magic devices that are a really (as in cost to effect and cost of construction) cost effective.

Uh, just because you can't think of one doesn't mean there aren't any. Allow me to refresh your memory.

Shun Mook Mpingo Disc $75

Holographic Foils $50/pack of hundreds

Mikro Brilliant Pebbles $39

CD treatments most under $100, many under $50

Nordost Anti-static Spray $50

Mapleshade Anti-static gun $50

Cryogenic freezing less than $10 per pound

C37 Lacquer around $50 per bottle

Teleportation Tweak $60

Schumann Frequency Generator - prices start around $125

Colored Pen - Sharpie Green Pen $3

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Not tweaks....though some on that list are most assuredly snake oil.

How would you differentiate a tweak from magic, or snakeoil, for that matter.  Do you go by smell or the name?

LOL

A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."  - Arthur C. Clarke

By a combination of exorbitant price and common sense. If it is more expensive than actual gear (like the $1000 power cord into the $800 component) , it is probably priced way, way ,way too high for its effect...

If it claimes to turn basemetal (poor sound) into gold (must have sound) I also am skeptical.

If it sounds like voodoo, I need a good argument to convince me (and that is more than the rally round the flag effect found in Audio magazines)

**the 'Rally Round the Flag' effect - the tendency of audio reviewers of the same magazine to support just about any claim made by any other reviewer in the magazine even when it is laughable on its face. This is often carried to an extreme...for example, a voodoo product blessed by a reviewer often has a high chance of making 'Buyers guides', Editors lists, 'Golden Ear' awards, etc (depending on the magazine). The chance of its making the list of recommended components seems to be directly proportional to the laughter evidenced by readers in letters or on forums like this t the reviewers claim. It is a refusal to admit error or even the possiblity of error.**

"But why

Posted: August 24, 2011 - 3:00pm

Do those Mumbo-Jumbo magic devices always cost scores of times more than their cost of production?"

Because they don't, is why. Key word: Always. Next key word: Scores.

You can buy yourself a green or black magic marker for short cash. You can buy (or borrow) a tape demagnetiser for very little and apply it to CDs and cables. You can use household Armor-All on a CD, although I'd wipe that particular fluid off after the experiment. You can elevate wires off the floor on cardboard tubes for free.  And you can put a photo of yourself in the freezer for free!

Tell us when you've availed yourself of these mooted remedies, or quitcher bitchin.

Have you not ever gone to a movie or play that 'the reviewers' loved and discovered it was simply pretentious dung? Reviewers are right 90% of the time (IMHO), a very good track record, but that does not mean that any individual reviewer cannot fall for the grift, the Hoodoo, the Magic or just simple polished sales pitch now and again. I own a lot of 'tweaks' that I am sure others would laugh at. That neither makes me right or them wrong...

The problem arises whan the particular bit of shamanism is way pricey or the claim is way oversold.

Perhaps this bit of magic does work as claimed...Is the result worth the very high cost for very few bits and pieces?

I believe cables DO have an effect on a system but I would consider 4 and 5 figure cables simply a scam. I do not believe vinyl demagnetizers or these particular devices or magic hockey pucks can possibly produce a change sufficient to warrnt their cost...

That the actual change cannot even be described without reference to audio alchemy (apologies to that fine company) is in itself enough to warrant wary skepticism.

I do not doubt 'they heard' (well mostly) but I do doubt that what they heard is comenserate with the price. I am especially skeptical when so many others simply do not hear the effect claimed.

I would love to read a review of one of these devices that simply said something like this...

"This gadget costs $$$$. It is well built and easy to instal. I can hear (whatever) in my system. I have no idea why as the manufacturers explanation is simply gibberish. If you are in the market for something to do (whatever) and are willing to spend a lot of money for something I cannot explain, go for it. It worked in my system'...moving on.

The enterprising audiophile can obtain a Radio Shack tape eraser on eBay any day of the week for around 20 bucks. Where's the beef? As was pointed out earlier, many of the tweaks that produce heartburn in the died in the wool naysayer are actually very inexpensive. So, where's the beef? Do you think that I am not skeptical of these tweaks, too, do you think you are the only one? There is a fine line between real skepticism and an overly suspicious nature.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Our hobby is ALL about price....If one could get class A performance on a system that costs $1K everyone would...the problem is, great sound seems to always require pretty big bucks. Recommending gear of dubious effect but with an undoubted high price is simply a subset of the bigger 'price' problem.

Not everyone is George Soros to whom spending a grand or so on a whim is about the same as most of us buying a coke when thirsty. In the real world, we look for guidance from reviewers as to what IS worth the high cost of admission....HooDoo is not in that category.

As to CD Spotlight...I agree, a valid review of a very inexpensive tweak....If the same item cost $1K, was packaged in a metal container and had exactly the same effect, came with gibberish claims and magic sounding explanation, and perhaps had a light that lit readomly so as to scare audio gremlins off the laser, I would call it way, way overpriced for the effect and put it in the snake oil category. Where the manufacturer went right was in price. As I have said repeatedly and as you have rejected, the ratio of price to effect is THE issue.

Let me, 'for instance'...Lets say I produce a cube about 4"x2"x8"...it is a sealed metal container. It can be placed on top of speakers so as to better the connection between the speaker and its stand or the floor. It will reduce cabinet vibrations, guaranteed. It can be placed on any piece of audio gear so as to do the same. It comes with felt pads the user can position so as to vary the result...on some gear the small end down sounds better than the broad end down and precise location is vital....The price for this wonder is only a budget $500, though you do need at least one for every speaker. My claims read like yours exactly..

"More "space" between instruments, and greater "air" around them, a more focused soundstage, with greater specificity to images. Staging is typically slightly wider, deeper, and taller, with heightened "illumination" of the rear left and right corners of the soundstage. The result is an overall perspective that is more honest, more faithful to reality, with better focus and more realistically sized.”

Is it a good value? Would it be a good value if I told you is is simply a standard sized brick wrapped in metal with $3 felt pads?

THAT is the point about price...

Reading this discussion really makes me sad. Sad because shows just how little audiophiles know about basic science. Putting a small cube with a small battery inside it on top of a loudspeaker along with a several other mystery devices placed within the can not possibly have any effect on the air molecules within the room.

Any sonic improvements heard as a result of installing these devices is just wishful thinking. Period. If I want to spend my time believing in things which can't and haven't ever been proven there are plenty of religions to choose from. However, unlike religion, high end is based on scientific principles and not on mere belief.

Now one should bear in mind that just as one is free to practice and give money to any religion one chooses so is one entitled to believe in and spend money on any audio tweak.

No insults are necessary or called for.

jazzfan wrote:

Reading this discussion really makes me sad. Sad because shows just how little audiophiles know about basic science. Putting a small cube with a small battery inside it on top of a loudspeaker along with a several other mystery devices placed within the can not possibly have any effect on the air molecules within the room.

>>Reading  what the naysayers have said in this discusssion is funny, mainly because they exhibit  both the proper outrage and air of superiority.  They claim to know everything about physics and electronics, yet cannot descibe the basics of the object of their derision, the SteinMusic Marmonizer.

Any sonic improvements heard as a result of installing these devices is just wishful thinking. Period. If I want to spend my time believing in things which can't and haven't ever been proven there are plenty of religions to choose from. However, unlike religion, high end is based on scientific principles and not on mere belief.

>>Gee, whiz, you almost convinced me it couldn't possibly work.  LOL  And, yes, you're right - audio is based on scientific principles.  It's just that you're obviously unfamiliar with them, that's all.

Now one should bear in mind that just as one is free to practice and give money to any religion one chooses so is one entitled to believe in and spend money on any audio tweak.

>>Spoken like a die-hard pseuo-skeotic.  Give my regards to The Amazing Randi.  LOL

No insults are necessary or called for.

 

If ya can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen.  LOL

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
Advanced Audio Concepts

The device is total nonsense. However there are still plenty of fools around to keep these quacks in business regardless of price. What I don't like is when these mystery devices are given the same claims to legitimacy as a well built and designed piece of less mysterious audio equipment as such as a speaker or power amp. Doing so makes audiophiles into audiofools.

It's not the money or the magic I object to, it's being told that I'm somehow close minded because I refuse to believe in something that isn't there and can NEVER be proven to be there. In other words, I'm not drinking the kool-aid.

Where would we be if it weren't for brave, forward thinking pioneers willing to go where no man has gone before. We would not have discovered new lands, Pilgrims would have been content with their lot and no ventured forth, there would have been no pioneers daring to go west, no denunciation of the old Newtonion physics, no relativity theory, no quantum physics, no space exploration, no black hole physics, no peering into the vast unknown with "magical" telescopes and microscopes.

In audio, we have come a long way from the rather absurd position that speakers and amplifiers are the only things that matter. We've seen advancements in wire technology, room tuning, vibration isolation, not to mention digital technology and turntable technology, to name a few. Anyone who refuses to believe huge strides in audio reproduction have been made in the last 20 years, irrespective of speaker and amplifier design, either has his head in the sand or is afraid of accepting history. Time for all the Rip Van Winkles to wake up and smell the coffee.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

You wrote....

"So, I will take PRICE out of the discussion and say “The demagnetising device is FREE !!"

Woud that it was true. The sad reality is that this thing is NOT free but very, very expensive and that it might (or might not) have the claimed effect on very expensive systems...Do we have any suggestion that it works on modest systems? Do we have any suggestion that it will work for most peple regardless?

If you are saying that folk with a few grand to throw away might find this device amusing to play with and might hear some change in their system, fine. I do not see anyone being able to say more than that.

Regardless of what anyone says, one simply cannot 'demagnetize' a non magnetic item. There might be some other unknown process at work but if that is the case, perhaps the manufacturers should begin removing bits and pieces of their device until the effect goes away, than put that bit back and optimize for the effect leaving imaginary demagnetizing alone. I suspect they could make the thing for a LOT less.

As to 'the problem on the backboard', it assumes the effect heard by some is real. What if it is not? Then all you have a chalk on the blackboard and wishful thinking.

You note the CD tweak as having a similar inexplicable effect. OK, it is a magic tweak that may or may not do anything BUT, it is a magic tweak that costs about 100 times LESS than the magic demagnetizer, bringing us back to the 'fool and his money'.

You simply cannot remove money from the equation as it is the money that separates the foolish audiophile from the wise one.

Put very simply, it is perhaps a foolish person who spends $30 on magic which might do something and an idiot who spends $2000 for magic which MIGHT do something.

Are you a gambler? I would be willing to bet $30 for the possibility that the thing does what it says. I would not make the same bet with $2K...Gambeler v sucker. Think lottery. One might buy a dozen lottery tickets knowing the odds of it hitting are very very low but 'what if'...A sentient being might think twice before buying a thousand tickets (knowing the odds of winning are actually only slightly increased by the additional tickets) for that very, very slight chance of winning...the 'what if ' remains a constant.

You might have wanted to discuss the effect of such devices in a room. Such a discussion assumes the effects are real. I add in a far more real issue, the cost of the things.

Is is ratioal to spend a LOT of money on devices that may or may not work at all and that cannot be explained? I contend it might make sense to spend small bucks on magic but big bucks is another issue entirely.

Why do I think you have a home full of magic gizmo's?

May Belt wrote:

“WHY are such devices being reported as improving the sound when no improvements would have been expected and if the devices are giving improvements in the sound HOW are they doing so ?”

Yup, there is a schism about this sort of stuff in Hi Fi.

Part 1 of the schism is this: Even if the differences were present, the explanation regarding how this difference is created rises to such a level of bullshit that it begins to obscure any sonic question.

May, some people actually listen to the claims "manufacturers" (and I use that term liberally here) make and are astounded that these new Einsteins so limit the use of their devices by restricting them to Hi Fi.

Amazing that they don't put on their tuxes and take their astounding physics to Oslo to accept their Nobels, isn't it?

Part 2 of the schism is the absolute lack of any demonstrable funtion of a device beyond the man-caves of gullible audiophiles.

Is it all due to the altruism of these "manufacturers" that they limit their benefiscent expertise only in the realm of things Hi Fi related?

So, fantastical claims and lack of any other applicability are the first two parts of the schism between the two 'camps' on this issue.

"Are you, sir, really suggesting that numerous well respected journalists and engineers – well versed in basic science, electronics and acoustics - have reported on certain unusual things giving improvements in the sound for over 30 years BECAUSE of “wishful thinking”, or because of “auto-suggestion, the placebo effect, bias, imagination, audio faith healing, effective marketing”, or as has been suggested by Buddha “that they needed such devices as a ‘prop’, a ‘potion’, an ‘elixir’, as a ‘ritual’ to ‘correct a defect which requires ‘remedial action’ “ or as suggested by Steve Eddy that “tweaking has more and more become a symptom of an underlying mental illness,”, or as opined by Jim Austin in a previous article in Stereophile that the reviewers have “prostituted themselves for the latest preposterous product” ???"

Yes.

You forgot an important item on your list. I call it the Clark Johnsen Phenomenon.

Amongst some audiophiles there is an obvious need to hear things, whether they are present, or not.

If someone of this personality type faces a 'does it do anything?' question, the answer is always yes. Invariably. They MUST hear something lest they have to face the possibility of someone saying, "What? You can't hear that?" These nuts always hear everything they are supposed to, it's Pavlovian for these types - they hear as they are told; assuaging some psychological fear of not being in the club of special hearers.

This is part 3 of the schism.

(For fun, reread Clark's ridiculous May Belt Chrismas Card story: "The card had remained in a pile of unread mail after my mid-December return from a trip. I was listening to music one night when finally I opened it and, finding this handsome Christmas card from May Belt, set it aside for later perusal. But at the same time I noted an improvement in the system's sound and leaned back to enjoy, leaving the rest of the stack untouched..." Amazing! The card was in the room all that time not exerting any effect until the envelop-barrier was broken to allow the card's 'affect' to take 'effect.' Good one. Clark broke the paper shield that can block Belt effects.)

"I would repeat again, that does not mean that everything everyone says HAS TO IMMEDIATELY and WITHOUT QUESTION be believed, but equally their experiences should not be summarily dismissed out of hand. Their experiences/observations are valid and are clues which add to the whole picture. Regards, May Belt, PWB Electronics. "

Part 4 of the schism: After getting past all the bullshit hockum of the underpinnings of how bogus tweaks must work, we find that the 'believers' are the only objects in the room that are immutable and constant. No chance they could be fooled.

A battery in a box may change air 'fluidity,' but last night's burrito could never affect them, nor their hydration status, no power of suggestion, etc...

Who May would deride as a deaf skeptic, the honest 'non-believer' acknowledges that we often fool ourselves. 'Believers,' never. 'Believers' are the open minded ones. Yeah, baby!

Part 5 of the schism: 'Believers' require foreknowledge of the ritual or remediation in order to be able to distinguish the sonic difference it makes. By definition, this is auto-suggestion. Dumbo's black feather, so to speak. They need this remediation to enable them to do what they can already do without the talisman. Then, they get upset that others don't require the same talisman! What they hear is better than what others must be hearing, because they have the talisman. 'Believers' think everyone should wear the same sonic spectacles that they do before they are able to see what the 'believer' does.

Part 5 is similar to the Clark Johnsen Effect, but adds to it in that 'believers' think one prescription treats some imagined ill shared by everybody else.

More of the schism later.

geoffkait wrote:

Where would we be if it weren't for brave, forward thinking pioneers willing to go where no man has gone before. We would not have discovered new lands, Pilgrims would have been content with their lot and not ventured forth, there would have been no pioneers daring to go west, no denunciation of the old Newtonion physics, no relativity theory, no quantum physics, no space exploration, no black hole physics, no peering into the vast unknown with "magical" telescopes and microscopes.

If the tweak 'manufacturers' had been Pilgrims, they'd still be living in the East Midlands in England telling people to take their word for it, there really is a new world out there but they shouldn't be expected to provide 'proof' for the silly old skeptics. "Here, plug this device into your Hi Fi and you will be transported to the new world - if you don't hear the new world, then you are a dirty old skeptic!"

What you omit is that what all those brave scientific pioneers accomplished included the ability to test their hypotheses.

Did Newton or Einstein say things like our tweak 'manufacturers' pull?

"Test it? Why would you ruin my perfectly good sciencebased new-physics tweak by insiting it be tested or validated? You say you want measurement? MEASUREMENTS? What's wrong with you skeptics? I don't need no stinking measurments, my theory is complete and unarguable, like morphic resonance! Next thing you know, you'll want to be able to demonstrate what I propose under blind conditions."

"Black holes? I Stephen Hawking say that's how it works. Look in the sky, see that black hole? Of course not, that proves me right! No I will not provide evidence. besides, I put the word "quantum" right in the name of my idea! You can't question anything with the word "quantum" in it"

Geoff, everything you mention was testable, provable, disprovable, or readily repeatable. Everything you mentioned goes hand in hand with objectivism, the antithesis of what you and May are all about.

Don't forget, there were also pioneers who believed in the inferiority of the black man, that phrenology was a science, that trephination or bleeding was a cure all, that DNA is fixed and immutable, that little homunculi lived in womens reproductive organs, that Newtonian physics was complete, that Aristotilian physics was complete, thet the solar system was geocentric....

This habit of tweak 'manufacturers falling back on the old trick of the appeal to eventual proof is something you, and especially May, should work away from: "They didn't believe Lister at first and he was proven right. They don't believe my schtick, so I must be like Lister, as well! See? I am thereby proven correct! Or, I will be, any minute now."

"In audio, we have come a long way from the rather absurd position that speakers and amplifiers are the only things that matter. We've seen advancements in wire technology, room tuning, vibration isolation, not to mention digital technology and turntable technology, to name a few. Anyone who refuses to believe huge strides in audio reproduction have been made in the last 20 years, irrespective of speaker and amplifier design, either has his head in the sand or is afraid of accepting history. Time for all the Rip Van Winkles to wake up and smell the coffee. Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica"

Geoff, from the time of the first opera and orchestra halls, or fine pub, acoustics have been well known as important sonic factors. If you care to do some research, you'll find the concept of room acoustics was well established before the first amplifier was ever created. No one ever took the absurd position that speakers and amplifiers are the only things that matter.

No one denies great strides have been made in digital or turntable design (well, except maybe Art Dudley) in the past twenty years.

Implying that Beltist or "Machina-ists" are somehow part of that is yet another fallacious attempt at tying your wagon to stuff that actually does do something.

It's a cute gag and all, but your false association with progress is not valid.

 

 

Bubbha, no need to yell. Controversial tweaks are the sport of kings, and requires big cojones. Isn't it about time you stopped being a wuss and grow a pair?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

Bubbha, no need to yell. Controversial tweaks are the sport of kings, and requires big cojones. Isn't it about time you stopped being a wuss and grow a pair? Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica

I wasn't yelling.

Funny you mention kings.

More like the sport of naked emperors.

These tweaks consist primarily of said naked emperors sitting around telling each other what impeccable taste they have in clothing.

I'll give you cojone credits for being so comfortable with fraud.

"And then I simply faxed him a tweak over the phone. In conjunction with my genius level clockware, I have the finest tuned system in the land. It's all due to my unique insight into true physics, and amazingly, it only applies to Hi Fi, you lucky rascals."

"Indubitably, sire."

Hi Buddha,

I second just about everything you've written. I only wish that I could have stated these things as well as you did.

What Geoff somehow manages not to mention are all the countless tweaks and pieces of audio mumbo jumbo which turned out to be, well, pure BS.

jazzfan wrote:

"Hi Buddha,

I second just about everything you've written. I only wish that I could have stated these things as well as you did."

A tip for members of the peanut gallery -- It might not be a real good idea to emulate someone who turns purple at the drop of a hat whenever the subject of controversial tweaks arises.

"What Geoff somehow manages not to mention are all the countless tweaks and pieces of audio mumbo jumbo which turned out to be, well, pure BS."

Uh, can you name just two "tweaks or pieces of audio mumbo jumbo" that turned out to be pure BS? Provide proof of your assertion, not just more idle chit chat. Betcha can't.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

Uh, can you name just two "tweaks or pieces of audio mumbo jumbo" that turned out to be pure BS? Provide proof of your assertion, not just more idle chit chat. Betcha can't. Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica

You have to be joking. Either that or you did drink the kool-aid.

Here are two easy ones for you:

1) The Infamous Tice Magic Clock

2) Each and every HDMI or USB costing over $25 per meter

Both of these have been conclusive proven to be 100% pure bullsh*t.

Now please stop your nonsense. Thanks

Actually, most reviews of the Tice Clock, many of which appeared in Stereophile Magazine, allow that something positive is going on when the clock is plugged into the system. Therefore, it seems only fair to dismiss any negative reviews of the clock in this light, laying the blame for such reviews on poor listening skills, an overly skeptical frame of mind and/or poorly resolving systems. With respect to your continued pseudo-skeptical attitude toward things you don't understand and have no experience with, I suspect you are most likely following the wrong sheep.

Tice R-4 TPT & Coherence ElectroTec EP-C "Clocks"
By Sam Tellig • Posted: May 28, 1995 • Published: May 28, 1990

Lars recently received a device that looks and works like a $25 digital alarm clock and is said to subtly improve the overall sound of one's system. It's the ElectroTec EP-C, from a company called Coherence Industries.

You plug it in and it's supposed to improve the conductivity of your household electrical system—have a "smoothing effect" on the motion of electrons so there is less chaos...less anarchy! More to come as I try to digest all of this. (As you can see, I'm getting into what seems to be Auntie Enid Lumley or Peter W. Belt territory, and over my head. Possibly out of my mind.)

Well, wouldn't you know? Lars had one of these "alarm clocks" sent to me, I plugged it in, and, of course, I didn't want to hear that the sound of my system has improved because I don't want to spend what would be $495 at retail for what is ostensibly nothing more than a $25 alarm clock. That's right—$5 short of $500 bucks retail. Isn't this technology grand? It lets you sell what seems to be a $25 digital alarm clock for 16 times more money? Of course, there's supposed to be a special, proprietary microprocessor inside.

Well, wouldn't you know it, my system never has sounded better. Is it because my AudioQuest Quartz Hyperlitz interconnect has been burning in? Because the Krell SBP-16X processor is sounding better and better? The Krell KSP-7B preamp? Or is the ElectroTec EP-C having some beneficial effect? Is this why I now find the music more natural, less artificial, more free of strain? The Swede is having his sweet revenge for all those yokes at his expense—yustice at last!—Sam Tellig

"An ordinary man has no means of deliverance." old audiophile axiom LOL

Geoff Kait
machina dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

Actually, most reviews of the Tice Clock, many of which appeared in Stereophile Magazine, allow that something positive is going on when the clock is plugged into the system. Therefore, it seems only fair to dismiss any negative reviews of the clock in this light, laying the blame for such reviews on poor listening skills, an overly skeptical frame of mind and/or poorly resolving systems. With respect to your continued pseudo-skeptical attitude toward things you don't understand and have no experience with, I suspect you are most likely following the wrong sheep.

First a review or even several reviews from appearing in a magazine which has shown time and time again that it exists solely to serve the advertisers and not the readers does not constitute proof that the TMC (Tice Magic Clock) was anything other than pure nonsense. The proof that the TMC was, is and forever will be nonsense is in the fact that these pieces of garbage are no longer available. The reason that they are no available is because people did not believe those ridiculous reviews and therefore did not waste their money on something that could not possibly work.

One thing I have come to understand is that arguing with you is a complete waste of my time and so I'm out of here.

“Regardless of what anyone says, one simply cannot 'demagnetize' a non magnetic item. There might be some other unknown process at work”

Quiote May: Exactly – "Exactly - there MIGHT be some other unknown (at the moment) process at work but without any investigations (discussions) as to what those processes might be, we won’t be any further along in our knowledge. "

Well, May, then why would a 'manufacturer' insist this claimed effect is the result of demagnetization? Bold faced, straight up claim.

I certainly didn't put the bullshit words in his mouth.

As you yourself know so well, May, every bullshit tweak artist spews in such a manner. From morphic resonance to 'quantum' devices. There must be some secret rule book for those people.

Take, for instance, the fraudulent science behind tweak 'manufacturers' who claim that their tweaks allow the listener to overcome evolutionary programming in order to 'sign off' on the safety of his listening environment so he can 'hear what's already in the room.'

Specific claims imply an actual understanding of a phenomenon. Are you, May, now claiming that all these tweak 'manufacturers' are simply misunderstood? They are saying, "Well, I don't really know how it works, but I think something good happened and I want your money so I'll toss of some bullshit about demagnetizing vinyl or cuckoo bird egg making?"

You, yourself operate at this sort of 'false claim' level. The fact that you just admitted that 'manufacturers' make false claims is actually the most open I've ever seen you!

Well done.

Trouble is, every single BS marketer in the BS tweak cabal has some code word type vocabulary maneuver to try to tie itself to an actual word from the world of science.

If the maker of said "LP Demagnetizer" has to resort to lies to make a claim for how a product works, then that does not bode well with regard to how he should be credited, in general.

Hell, now that we are finding out more about printed 'receipts' and the toxins they contain, it makes one wonder what the purveyors of such items sold as tweaks have been sniffing. Imagine, selling a pseudo cash register receipt with toxic ink as a tweak. Is there no shame? And....it was sold as an item that promoted a user's subconcious sense of safety within his environment.

We are surely surrounded by snakes in the grass, May.

Quick link to toxins contained in Belt type tweaks:

http://ecowomen.net/2010/02/22/bpa-risks-in-cash-register-receipts/

Your continued unwillingness to have an intelligent discussion on the subject only delineates your lack of experience in these matters and close-mindedness. Your failure to provide proof of your claim of BS is just another indication that you've got some sort of preordained distain for tweaks you find disturbing to you personally. Of course, the intelligent, and scientific, approach would be to investigate the Tice Clock yourself, then draw conclusions, rather than take someone's word for it, positive or negative. As it stands, your foregone conclusion, proclaiming BS, means absolutely zip. Self-proclaimed "skeptics" like yourself never investigate, only castigate. Isn't that what separates mice from men?

"One thing I have come to understand is that arguing with you is a complete waste of my time and so I'm out of here."

But you have demonstrated a decided inability to argue intelligently. I therefore claim victory in this debate.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

Fine you win but it's people like you who give high end audio not only a bad name but go a long way in allowing so many people, who might otherwise be willing to spend their money on some decent audio equipment, to spend it middle level mass market junk.

There is no way "argue intelligently" with you since there is no basis or standard from which I am allowed to claim. Hard science you simply dismiss as not advanced enough to use. Market response, as in people refusing to buy into the wild claims made by many of the manufacturers of these "magic audio" products, you dismiss as just a bunch close minded individuals.

May I suggest that join forces with fellow forum member MarkBryston and start a company promoting and selling super high resolution digital recordings. By super high resolution I am referring to recordings having greater than 32 bit depth and sample rates in excess of 192 kHz since, after all, the science of digital recording and human hearing is not advanced enough to realize that anything less than super high resolution just doesn't work.

"What if the effect heard IS real ?"

Then we have a different set of questions...does it work in the far more modest systems most of us have? Is the effect common to all/most systems? Do more folk hear the change in the sound than do not? and....

Is it worth the big bucks being charged?

I am skeptical as to the actual effect and find the price hilarious. Again, it could be reviewed as I proposed earlier

"This very expensive device had a real effect in my system. I heard (whatever). The manufacturer explains what is causing the effect but, it reads like the claims in a shop selling magic crystals and does not seem to fit any known science. If you are in the market for the effect I have described, have the long green for the device and do not mind having no idea how the device works, by all means give it a try."

jazzfan wrote:

Fine you win but it's people like you who give high end audio not only a bad name but go a long way in allowing so many people, who might otherwise be willing to spend their money on some decent audio equipment, to spend it middle level mass market junk.

>>>>>You get an A for name calling, F for anything else of interest to say.

There is no way "argue intelligently" with you since there is no basis or standard from which I am allowed to claim. Hard science you simply dismiss as not advanced enough to use. Market response, as in people refusing to buy into the wild claims made by many of the manufacturers of these "magic audio" products, you dismiss as just a bunch close minded individuals.

>>>>I have already presented evidence that disputes your protestations of BS. You actually don't have a leg to stand on and you just won't take No for an answer. Besides, we're not talking about other people or what I might or might not think about them - we're talking about YOU. And YOU cannot provide evidence or proof to back up your claim of BS, so I dismiss you as just another ranting anti-tweak pseudo-skeptic. In other words, I'm dismissing YOU as a close-minded individual.

May I suggest that join forces with fellow forum member MarkBryston and start a company promoting and selling super high resolution digital recordings. By super high resolution I am referring to recordings having greater than 32 bit depth and sample rates in excess of 192 kHz since, after all, the science of digital recording and human hearing is not advanced enough to realize that anything less than super high resolution just doesn't work.

>>>>>You obviously have no idea what the heck you're talking about; besides, your latest rant is totally off the subject. Can I suggest a valium?

Tootles,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
We do Artificial Atoms Right

jazzfan wrote:

Fine you win but it's people like you who give high end audio not only a bad name but go a long way in allowing so many people, who might otherwise be willing to spend their money on some decent audio equipment, to spend it middle level mass market junk.

There is no way "argue intelligently" with you since there is no basis or standard from which I am allowed to claim. Hard science you simply dismiss as not advanced enough to use. Market response, as in people refusing to buy into the wild claims made by many of the manufacturers of these "magic audio" products, you dismiss as just a bunch close minded individuals.

May I suggest that join forces with fellow forum member MarkBryston and start a company promoting and selling super high resolution digital recordings. By super high resolution I am referring to recordings having greater than 32 bit depth and sample rates in excess of 192 kHz since, after all, the science of digital recording and human hearing is not advanced enough to realize that anything less than super high resolution just doesn't work.

Hey, Jazz!

I would add what I think is an important factor for people like Geoff and May's fear of science:

It isn't that it isn't advanced enough for them....it's that it is rigorous and lays their false claims out. Science to them is like sunlight to a vampire.

The method of honest 'science,' with the actual 'investigating' and 'repeating' and trying to limit the all important underpinnings of suggestion, talisman, or ritual  renders their false tweaks ineffective. (Watch what they attack most vehemently and you'll get an idea of where they are obfuscating.)

Their voodoo can't stand up to any rigorous questioning, so they fall back on calling people who believe in honest investigation 'skeptics.'

It's pretty funny, we trust science and method and critical thinking. They disdain it, then call us the skeptics. They approach their craft with cynicism and salesbabble and identify others as skeptics for displaying any critical faculties.

All very old hat and automatic for them, at this point.

Watch May, she says she wants to dicuss and figure things out....see if she can step out of her dogma regarding her own tweaks.

Buddha wrote:

Hey, Jazz!

I would add what I think is an important factor for people like Geoff and May's fear of science:

It isn't that it isn't advanced enough for them....it's that it is rigorous and lays their false claims out. Science to them is like sunlight to a vampire.

The method of honest 'science,' with the actual 'investigating' and 'repeating' and trying to limit the all important underpinnings of suggestion, talisman, or ritual  renders their false tweaks ineffective. (Watch what they attack most vehemently and you'll get an idea of where they are obfuscating.)

Their voodoo can't stand up to any rigorous questioning, so they fall back on calling people who believe in honest investigation 'skeptics.'

It's pretty funny, we trust science and method and critical thinking. They disdain it, then call us the skeptics. They approach their craft with cynicism and salesbabble and identify others as skeptics for displaying any critical faculties.

All very old hat and automatic for them, at this point.

Watch May, she says she wants to dicuss and figure things out....see if she can step out of her dogma regarding her own tweaks.

Thanks Buddha!

geoffkait wrote:

>>>>>You get an A for name calling, F for anything else of interest to say.

>>>>I have already presented evidence that disputes your protestations of BS. You actually don't have a leg to stand on and you just won't take No for an answer. Besides, we're not talking about other people or what I might or might not think about them - we're talking about YOU. And YOU cannot provide evidence or proof to back up your claim of BS, so I dismiss you as just another ranting anti-tweak pseudo-skeptic. In other words, I'm dismissing YOU as a close-minded individual.

>>>>>You obviously have no idea what the heck you're talking about; besides, your latest rant is totally off the subject. Can I suggest a valium?

Okay so here we go. Where exactly did I call anyone a name? I may have called a worthless piece of junk as worthless piece but I did not call anyone a name.

On the other hand, you have called me names several times:

"close-minded individual" because I want REAL proof that something works and a valid reason for how and why it works.

"You obviously have no idea what the heck you're talking about" because I call into question simply believing in something that cannot possibly be true.

Now I proved why the Tice Magic Clock was, is and will always a complete piece of BS: NO ONE BOUGHT THEM ONCE THEY REALIZED WHAT A BUNCH OF BULLSHIT THEY WERE.

And I'll prove to you why each and every HDMI and USB cable costing over $25 per meter is a waste of money (note: I did not say "total waste of money" since one still a functioning cable out of the deal): http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2147107,00.asp - a link to article from a magazine/website that does take advertising money from cable manufacturers.

It's about high time you came back Bro. We have missed your fun to read posts my friend.

Mark

Surprise, surprise, more ranting and raving. LOL Apparently, you've taken a page from Buddha, the lead huff and puffer around here, and commenced yelling. . Actually, you're dead wrong (as usual). Lots of folks bought Tice products, including the Tice Clock. That's why Tice stayed in business for such a long time, silly. Besides, the clock I sell is much more disturbing than the Tice ever thought of being. Trust me, you would break out in hives.

""close-minded individual" because I want REAL proof that something works and a valid reason for how and why it works?"

No, close-minded because you will not listen to reason.

Who cares about your wild theories regarding HDMI cables? Not I. 

Geoff Kait

Machina Dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

Surprise, surprise, more ranting and raving. LOL Apparently, you've taken a page from Buddha, the lead huff and puffer around here. Actually, you're dead wrong (as usual). Lots of folks bought Tice products, including the Tice Clock. That's why Tice stayed in business for such a long time, silly. Besides, the clock I sell is much more disturbing than the Tice ever thought of being. Trust me, you would break out in hives. ""close-minded individual" because I want REAL proof that something works and a valid reason for how and why it works?" No, close-minded because you will not listen to reason. Who cares about your theories regarding HDMI cables? Not I. Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica

Not listen to reason. How dare you invoke reason went everything you sell absolutely defies reason.

Look, not wanting to take the claims the of some salesman, which, after all is exactly what you are, at face value is not being closed minded, rather it is being very, very sensible.

The "theories" regarding HDMI and USB cables are not mine, they are taken directly from a understanding of how the transmission of digital data works and from the test bench of a well respected computer publication.

Speaking of salesmen, I have a nice bridge available and if you act now I will throw in all the cars on the bridge at no extra charge.

All kidding aside, I'm going to strongly request that you and all the salesmen be limited to posting in the "Manufacturers' Showcase" section of this forum so as to not sully the waters of the rest of the forum. By the way, for those of you following along at home, please do a search on the term "Machina Dynamica fraud" and see what comes up.