Quote:

Quote:
Jan Vigne claimed that Mr. Denny was turning to a such an explanation ...

This is not true.

Quote:
... but when asked refused to provide what this assertion was based on.

This also is not true.

Sadly, both are true.

Jan, I asked you:

"Has Ted Denny adopted a "changes the listener" hypothesis rather than the "changes the physical sound" presented on the Synergistic website?"

You responded (6/1/10):

Quote:
Not "rather" but, yes, as I read his statements he has referenced changes to the listeners' perception But you'll have to find it yourself - an impossible task for you to be sure.

Once again, you refuse to provide Mr. Denny's statements to which you refer. Instead you insult.

Please share this exegesis rather than continue your refusal. Please avoid silly semantic arguments as to the degree to which Mr. Denny is adopting such an explanation.

SHARE for a change. Make a POSITIVE contribution to the discussion.

Quote:

Quote:
Jan claimed he came up with a theory of operation by studying and giving the issue considerable thought.

This is only half true. I came by my hypothesis through thinking, reading, conversation and discussion which was then followed by empirical research and more thinking.

Cool! So TELL US what you concluded and how you came to this conclusion. Your "empirical research" would be of particular interest.

Quote:

Quote:
However, he refused to disclose this "theory," ...

I have disclosed my hypothesis several times on this forum.

So you claim. As I cannot find this, perhaps you will be so kind to show us ignorant, lazy, insufferable, idiots where you so posted.

Even better as I am probably not clever enough to follow a link - the procedure being so complex - you could simply copy your hypothesis here for all to see.

Summary:

Time to put up, Jan.

As they say in Texas, you're all hat and no cattle.

So, where's the beef?

Quote:

Quote:
I may be misreading this, but there appears to be a tendency to claim both 1) these devices have conventional effects which can be measured and, 2) they are unconventional and their effects are entirely different and measurements are irrelevant.

It would appear that Ted D claims (1).
I, personally, would suggest (2) but without YOUR addition at the end, Elk, of saying that measurements are irrelevant. I know enough about science to know that measurements CAN be significant and dependable. The questions are, when applied to different circumstances, WHAT measurements would be meaningful. WHAT exactly to measure. HOW to measure. IF any measurements could, actually, be taken !! And that whilst we are waiting, trying to figure out what measurements might be both possible and relevant, we can still be 'thinking' and experimenting !!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of dismissing !!!

Sounds good.

Do you have any ideas as to how/why the Acoustic ART products work?

Do they fit into any of your ideas of listener perception?

Any ideas as to what might be measured to examine their efficacy?

Post deleted by Stephen Mejias

Quote:
Sadly, both are true.

In reality, both of my original statements are true. You are not telling the truth.

Elk, please, you don't understand what I post but you constantly insist you can tell me what it is I have posted. I did not claim "Mr. Denny was turning to a such an explanation" and, if I didn't claim it was said it would be impossible for me to "provide what this assertion was based on".

My thoughts on the devices are mine and mine alone. I have had a few conversations with Ted about his products. I have no intention of divulging anything discussed in private. Other than those few conversations you have the exact same materials available to you that I have had in my research. You need to make use of them and, if you do not find what you claim I said, then consider this not to be my fault - again. I do not control what you or anyone else interprets into my posts, I only control what I intend to say. Do not blame me for your interpretation.

Quote:
Instead you insult.

Please, Elk, this is getting old. If you read an insult in that post, if you dislike my "tone", it is in your interpretation and not in my writing. I think had you read all of my posts through and actually considered what I posted and what I was responding to, you might not find these imaginary insults to exist at all.

Quote:
Please share this exegesis rather than continue your refusal. Please avoid silly semantic arguments as to the degree to which Mr. Denny is adopting such an explanation.

SHARE for a change. Make a POSITIVE contribution to the discussion.

I have explained this and explained this and explained this, the materials are there for you to find on your own. I am not required to lead you by the hand.

Why don't you discuss someone else's concepts and leave mine alone, Elk? That would be making a positive contribution to the forum. Harrasssing me isn't going to get you anywhere. I don't intend to carry on with this when you can find the exact same materials I have accessed and do so on your own.

Make this the last time you mention this, Elk.

Quote:
So TELL US what you concluded and how you came to this conclusion. Your "empirical research" would be of particular interest.

I concluded Ted is on to something. Now it's your turn to try some thinking, reading, conversation and discussion which was then followed by empirical research and more thinking.

Your comments on such would be of particular interest I'm sure.

Quote:
So you claim. As I cannot find this, perhaps you will be so kind to show us ignorant, lazy, insufferable, idiots where you so posted.

Even better as I am probably not clever enough to follow a link ...

You said it, Elk, not me.

One more thing, Elk.

Quote:
Retract your defamation immediately.

Content?

Positive addition to the discussion?

Information?

We can only conclude that you have none of the information you allege, nor reached any conclusions, nor performed any "empirical research."

Nada. Zilch. Unadulterated posturing.

Why is it that so many "non-judgmental independent thinkers" cannot produce anything when pressed?

Once cannot squeeze cogent thoughts from even noisy turnips.

I say you have nothing but noise and hot air. Not even a hint of cows mooing in the distance.

Prove me wrong.

In the meantime I can rest comfortably; truth is an absolute defense to your allegation of defamation.

Post deleted by Stephen Mejias

Quote:
Content?

Positive addition to the discussion?

Information?

We can only conclude that you have none of the information you allege, nor reached any conclusions, nor performed any "empirical research."

Nada. Zilch. Unadulterated posturing.

Why is it that so many "non-judgmental independent thinkers" cannot produce anything when pressed?

Once cannot squeeze cogent thoughts from even noisy turnips.

I say you have nothing but noise and hot air. Not even a hint of cows mooing in the distance.

Prove me wrong.

In the meantime I can rest comfortably; truth is an absolute defense to your allegation of defamation.

What you see here is a simple, intentional attempt by a couple of people to derail the conversation by dissembling in various ways.

The actual claim about acoustics has not been demonstrated. The supposed evidence has been admitted to be measurement error. This speaks more highly for the gentleman involved than for his would-be supporters.

As to the blithering about helmholz resonators vs. "bowls", well, everyone who does circuit design at any level knows the difference between a driving function (say air pressure or volume velocity) and a frequency response (say that of a helmholtz resonator). And, yes, we know that some of the people going on about this codswallop are entirely capable of designing electronic circuitry.

Post deleted by Stephen Mejias

Quote:
Prove me wrong.

You've done that yourself - multiple times over.

SM, I have informed Elk that I consider his continued badgering regarding this topic, now having gone on for over more than two weeks' time and over two separate threads, to be harrassment on his part. I have stated this repeatedly during the time his prodding and his insults have continued and escalated. You know that to be true if you've read my posts. You can see his continued insults and harrassment over the weeks.

I have asked Elk to end his harrassment of me over this topic. A polite request was made several times, all to no avail. I've provided the same answers to all of his proddings and they are the only answers he's going to get,
"read", "research", "think" and "audition". If he doesn't care for those answers, he should look elsewhere and stop harrassing me.

I've also stated the same polite request multiple times, all of which he has ignored because he knows he can get away with insulting me on this forum without intervention from you or anyone else.

It seems he cannot be satisfied with a simple "no" as he continues with his insults and his provocations.

When polite requests did not stop his rude behavior I told Elk, in no uncertain terms, to stop such actions at once. I've done so several times now to no avail. You can see an example in my previous post, I don't know how I could have made it any simpler or plainer that I wanted his game to stop and stop now.

Now, as a forum member who feels they are being harrassed, I would prefer you as moderator of this forum take some action here to put a stop to this ceaseless prodding, badgering and harrassment. That's a formal request, Stephen. I do still have some expectation that I will not be insulted and harrassed on this forum, do I not?

If provocation is Elk's ultimate goal, he will not find it in my responses, I am simply tired of the game he prefers to play. I was tired of it two weeks ago.

He had my answer - my only answer - two weeks ago. If he cannot remember it or cannot find it, he needs to do his research on his own and leave me alone and most of all stop insulting me when I've done nothing to cause this.

Stephen, put a stop to this. This is part of your job when numerous polite requests have failed, correct?

Elk, hope these help with the population you are dealing with.

Quote:

If provocation is Elk's ultimate goal, he will not find it in my responses, I am simply tired of the game he prefers to play. I was tired of it two weeks ago.

Hi Jan.
I appreciate your recent attempts at keeping the thread civil and on topic. Thank you.

If you want to end the discussion with Elk, I think you can just tell him so. I can't speak for Elk, but he might understand and he might agree that there's nothing left to discuss.

Elk, Jan: It seems you two have reached an impasse. Maybe it's time to drop the conversation?

Other than making that small suggestion, I don't think there's anything else for me to do in this situation. I'm confident you can work it out for yourself.

Quote:

Quote:

If provocation is Elk's ultimate goal, he will not find it in my responses, I am simply tired of the game he prefers to play. I was tired of it two weeks ago.

Hi Jan.
I appreciate your recent attempts at keeping the thread civil and on topic. Thank you.

If you want to end the discussion with Elk, I think you can just tell him so. I can't speak for Elk, but he might understand and he might agree that there's nothing left to discuss.

Elk, Jan: It seems you two have reached an impasse. Maybe it's time to drop the conversation?

Other than making that small suggestion, I don't think there's anything else for me to do in this situation. I'm confident you can work it out for yourself.

While you're at it, you can't put an end to SASAudio's delusions, but you CAN put an end to his endlessly spamming them here.

Please do so.

Post deleted by Stephen Mejias

Post deleted by Stephen Mejias

This thread has run its course, so it's time to lock it. I am going to please do so now.

If you'd like to open a new thread on this or a similar topic, please do so.