Quote:
Dude, your hearing is defective. Obviously Froggie is a far more advanced audiophile than you because he heard a difference in the first three seconds. KBK can hear better than you too, as I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you in great detail. Indeed, what the hell are you even doing in this forum anyway? This forum is for advanced audiophiles like the Toadie, not pedestrian amateur listeners like you and me.

Despite the further unprovoked dumb grade-school name calling and insults from you, I have to say this is about the only sensible thing you've said all year. But given the fact that I demoed the Furutech with a total non-audiophile friend, much less a self-professed "audio pro", who heard the same differences I did, and that you couldn't the differences if your life depended on it, I don't think I would be so quick to bump you up to "pedestrian amateur listener" status. Now how about you surprise us all and take your own advice for a change? Move to a forum where your constant stupid senseless anti-audiophile rants will be better appreciated.

Quote:
Of course, Toad couldn't identify my excerpts because he didn't already know which are which in advance. So all he has left is to complain my files are not correct extracts. I'm still chuckling over that.

--Ethan

Yeah, and I'm sure Michael Lavorgna, the audio reviewer for 6 Moons, who was one of us who also heard differences between your files and MF's originals, is chuckling as well. I'm still chuckling over the fact that you were too cowardly to accept my challenge to take your own listening test, when you don't already know which are which in advance! Which is basically you telling us how bogus you think your own test is to begin with! Add to that chuckling, the raucous laughter over the fact that you were also too cowardly to take FC's demag test. Because you didn't already know which are which in advance. And I see you are still insisting on making these same lying claims about me, after I have already asked you to back them up.

Since I never claimed that I tested your files, you are only showing evidence about yourself that you are a proven liar, and can't be trusted to be honest with the members of this forum. Which also shows how you avoid taking responsibility for your own lying claims/words. Which in turn, kind of makes testing your files a moot point, doesn't it? If you can lie so glibly, in defense of your lies that the Furutech is snake oil, then you will lie when it comes time to publish your results. In order to maintain your previous false claims about the Furutech, and try to compensate for your failed listening abilities. Oh wait, I almost forgot. That will never happen, because you stated twice you would never publish the results until I took the test! (Stating otherwise will prove you to have been lying again). Which means you wasted everyone's time, who did humour you and take your joke of a vengeance test. Not that anyone cares about you or your silly face-saving vengeance test at this point, I don't think. Sorry to say! So you have nothing left to do here but bait me! How sad. Anyway, time to put a fork in it Ethan. I think you and your little test scam are done here.

Yeah, I know. Let's assume that they can all hear like friggin' dogs and that they can hear the difference in the files. Let's say that they are the "special" group that can really hear better than the average audiophile, much less the average Joe.

That would STILL make the Furutech tweak controversial and subject to skepticism because MF swore up and down that the difference was profound and that EVERYONE could hear it.

I already told you, that's not what I heard him say. That is your interepretation. Own it. It's just stupid for you to continue to mischaracterize people's words like this, and it makes you appear "suspect", and hardly without bias. Anyway, I'm not gonna argue about this with you any longer. I think intelligent audiophiles already understand that nobody can speak for everyone in the world, that MF must have been talking about his friends and colleagues he tested it on, and to dismiss your silly rant for what it is. Biased hyperbole.

And second of all, MF does not represent Furutech last I checked. Whatever he says about it is to be considered his opinion. Not the word of God on the Furutech issue. Again, the only two things you said here that are correct, is the same nonsense you repeated yesterday. That the Furutech is still controversial and subject to skepticism. But that's a meaningless statement, because most things in audio are. You might as well be saying "Gosh I can't believe this, but it appears some people are STILL more evolved than others in this world!".

Well, obviously not EVERYONE can hear it and even some of those who CAN hear it say that the difference is subtle.

Big deal. You can say that same thing on just about EVERYTHING in audio. That's another meaningless statement. Obviously, you have never read product reviews on the internet. How CAN it be POSSIBLE that SO MANY people on EPINIONS (for example) can POSSIBLY give the VERY SAME product 1 star, while OTHERS give it 5 stars, citing quite the OPPOSITE experience. Mysteries of life, I guess....

So, even if we remove ourselves from the discussion of whether the stuff CAN work or if there are laws of physics that can substantiate Furutech's claims,

There's no discussion on whether it CAN work. That's been proven that there are laws of phsyics that substantiates the Furutech's claims. The only controversy here comes from ignorants like Ethan, who don't understand the first thing about petroleum engineering, and create "controversies" and claims of "CAN'T WORK!" from out of their own ignorance of science. That's nothing new either, btw.

the fact that over half the people who heard the files found little to no difference leads me to believe that the Furutech claims and MF's endorsements are suspect.

So then demo the unit yourself. What's stopping you, other than the fact that you can't afford it, or would never buy this anyway if you could? The fact that you don't own any LP's? Yeah, that I can see.

I can accept that I may not be able to hear the difference and I can accept that you can.

No, both of you were unable to hear differences in MF's files. What do you think all the grumbling was about on EW's part?

However, we're talking a substantial number of people who can't hear the difference. We're talking people with ears, not deaf and stupid people like us.

How "substantial" are we talking about, Alex? Throw me a figure. Just put make sure to put some meat behind it. I don't want another of your personal "interpretations" of what went on in this thread, pretending to be objectivity. List the names of the "people with ears", who are not deaf like you and Winer, who heard MF's files, and couldn't hear any differences. Then maybe we can see if there is any merit at all in what you're saying.

Quote:
Let's assume that they can all hear like friggin' dogs and that they can hear the difference in the files. Let's say that they are the "special" group that can really hear better than the average audiophile, much less the average Joe.

Here's a quote from Arny Krueger:

Quote:
...I did report hearing a difference between the untreated and treated LP in 20 of 30 total trials in a DBT.

How would you explain this? Here are Ethan's suggestions if you prefer multiple choice: "comb filtering, placebo effect, expectation bias, and arrogance".

As far as your "substantial number of people who can't hear the difference" I count three: you, Ethan and Axon. And Axon said he listened to the files once through his headphones that have no significant output below 50hz.

He also said:

Quote:

Dr David Baguley, audiologist:

"His own theory - based on years of research - is that many sufferers' hearing has become over-sensitive.

Surrounded in his office by plastic models of human ears, he explains how we each have an internal volume control that helps us amplify quiet sounds in times of threat, danger or intense concentration.(Audiophile, anyone???)

"If you're sitting by a table waiting for exam results and the phone rings you jump out of your skin. Waiting for a teenager to come home from a party - the key in the door sounds really loud. Your internal gain is sensitised."

This is a mechanism we all rely on at moments of pressure or stress when we want our senses on full alert.

According to Dr Baguley, the problem comes when an individual fixes on a possibly innocuous background sound, and this act of concentration then triggers the body's "internal gain", boosting the volume.

The initial "signal" may vary from person to person, but the outcome is the same."

The above comes from an article about people who hear a never ending 'hum'. (UK) The vast majority are women in the menopausal component of their biological lives. I have heard tell from people I know and have no reason to doubt... of older men who are so over-sensitized than they can nearly hear a spider weave it's web. Digital power supplies, wall warts, all verboten in their presence. Too loud.

Smart people investigate. They ask why. They are wise enough to 'turn the chessboard around' and attack the issue from the other viewpoint. This is known as proper science, and proper debate. Position and counter position. Then flip yourself around. Maintaining a single position means you maintain a skewed and myopic viewpoint.

Idiots.... deny.

It really is -- that simple.

Quote:
Here's a quote from Arny Krueger:

Quote:
...I did report hearing a difference between the untreated and treated LP in 20 of 30 total trials in a DBT.

How would you explain this? Here are Ethan's suggestions if you prefer multiple choice: "comb filtering, placebo effect, expectation bias, and arrogance".

You are confused. These are hypotheses for why sighted tests might indicate results that aren't borne out by DBTs. Arny's result was from a DBT, which controls for all of these parameters.

Quote:
Then there was Axon

Quote:
The vast majority are women in the menopausal component of their biological lives.

Do us all a favor...Get a hysterectomy.

Perhaps a hystericalectomy would be even better

Ouch! That was cold! But if it's just full of sand might as well take that one too.

Quote:
I have no idea what you just said or what relevance it has to the subject at hand, which is why this thread should be closed as it has deteriorated to the point of sheer stupidity.

For once I agree with AlexO. Everyone that WANTS to state their opinion already has, many people SEVERAL times. It degenerated into name calling long ago.

Hey, hey don't take those, man.

Michael,

I have been very careful to stay out of the "testing" fray and the scientific discussion.

So, let's assume that there is a measurable difference and that people who say they hear a difference actually hear it (I have no reason to doubt them). That still leaves over half the people who heard little or no difference. So, where that leaves us is that the effect that this tweak has on the sound makes a difference to only half the people who try that. That means that the difference is most likely not significant enough to warrant such a prolonged and painful "discussion".

Jan,

If you scroll up, to my previous posts, you will see me quoting MF saying that EVERYONE can EASILY hear the difference.

So we disagree on the perceived significance of the effect. Excellent. Next?

Quote:
Maybe I should claim that Martians enter my apartment when I leave, move my furniture around, then put it back exactly where it was before I get back.

Does your hifi sound better?

Quote:
How would you explain this? Here are Ethan's suggestions if you prefer multiple choice: "comb filtering, placebo effect, expectation bias, and arrogance".

You are confused. These are hypotheses for why sighted tests might indicate results that aren't borne out by DBTs. Arny's result was from a DBT, which controls for all of these parameters.

But arny stated this on page 68

Quote:
I strongly suspect that the Furutech device has no audible effects, but I did report hearing a difference between the untreated and treated LP in 20 of 30 total trials in a DBT.

Arny states this on page 70

Quote:
I guess that your CD demagnetiser is like a little talisman, a lucky charm that you use to drive away random attacks of the bad sound demons?

Expectation bias, mentioned twice. And expectation bias is mental, which corrupts the input data we use to determine confidence. How are we to believe you when you either don't understand your own dbt tests or are not honest with the public?

Quote:
As mentioned, the burden of proof rests with those who make the claim.

And where is the proof that audio subjective dbts are accurate? Arny unwittingly brought up expectation bias when performing his tests. And I bet the public does not know about these biases in dbt tests. Hiding problems with dbts from the public are we. Hmmmm.

AlexO stated

Quote:
That still leaves over half the people who heard little or no difference.

And who were the ones who did not hear a difference? Most were your side, who have repeatedly demonstrated expectation bias.

Quote:
If you scroll up, to my previous posts, you will see me quoting MF saying that EVERYONE can EASILY hear the difference.

Yes, he said everyone including skeptics (my emphasis).

--Ethan

I think it's safe to say that this topic (whatever it is) will remain complicated and controversial for a good long while -- that's just the nature of the beast. I'll close this thread now, and, since people seemed to enjoy it so much, I'll make it sticky. If anyone has anything they'd like to add, or if any new test results come up, you should feel free to start a brand spanking new thread. I hope we can move forward in an interesting and intelligent direction.

Happy Memorial Day. Have a great weekend.