Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

Propeller Head Plaza

Blind listening test of power cords - and reactions to it.

129.33.19.254

Some poor soul decided it would be good idea to post results of his positive test of power cords on HydrogenAudio. Apparently, judging by # of posts under his belt, didn't know what he's doing - or, exactly the opposite, knew what he was doing, and wanted to provoke certain reaction.
And provoke he did!
The most notable ideas from 3 pages of responses:
- results are fake
- results are wrong
- test wasn't performed properly
- multiple suggestions about guy's mental condition
- multiple appeals to modern eletrical theory
- Randi's challenge mentioned several times
What I liked most:
- one moderator's suggestion that, since their ABX procedures were designed primarily for lossy codecs, and don't necessarily apply to hardware, he simply needs to TRY HARDER, to prove it to the people at HA;
- another moderator's suggestion that guy record at speaker terminals using ADC, and distribute the resulting files for them to evaluate - again, to prove it;
- at some point, 6(!) wacked-out, frothing-at-the-mouth posts by Arnie Krueger were combined by moderator into one (apparently, it's common practice there for mods to edit the posts);
- idea that "wrong" audiophiles hijacked termin "audiophile", so "real" audiophiles (them, apparently) invented termin "audiophool" to distinguish between two;
- original poster's quiet departure, apparently after some of his replies were blocked by moderators.
All of that can be found under "Listening tests" on their web site (no link, since it doesn't seem to be appreciated by mods here).

Sorry, kids at Prop Head - for entertainment value, HA is solid #1 place in my book.

Edits: 09/25/09 09/25/09

Follow Ups:

RE: Blind listening test of power cords - and reactions to it. - andy19191 16:44:01 09/28/09 (107)
> Blind listening test of power cords - and reactions to it.

The reactions posted here are indeed revealing. What do you think a neutral observer rather than a committed tribal member would make of them?
- No idea, and don't give a damn. But you're not talking about yourself, hopefully. N/T - carcass93 05:27:17 09/29/09 (16)
  N/T
  - RE: No idea, and don't give a damn. But you're not talking about yourself, hopefully. N/T - andy19191 01:47:44 09/30/09 (15)
    > But you're not talking about yourself, hopefully.
    
    Not really because I have observed the audiophile phenomenon for a while. I was referring to people that have not adopted audiophile beliefs and therefore feel no urge to defend the tribe in the manner of the posters here nor those that have adopted an anti-audiophile position.
    
    I would suggest that even though such a person may not follow the details they will be able to see the behaviour. A group of people with shared beliefs that they feel sufficiently insecure about to chase off those that do not share them, crow about it afterwards and even, apparently, stalk them to sites which do not share the beliefs.
    - That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface - kerr 08:03:19 09/30/09 (13)
      And that's been pretty common around here. This thread is like audio itself; if they want was is easy to pick up rather than the truth that lies beneath, they probably don't belong here anyway, and I'd have to go with Carcass' "don't give a damn" reply.
      
      As for Richard, he and I may not have agreed on things audio but we did agree that music was more important than the system. So in the grand scheme of things, we agreed on 90% of the most important matters concerning what comes out of loudspeakers. I hope he's happy at H/A - and he should be because he's among like minded people. Recently my opinion of H/A has changed a bit. I still have to weed through faulty conclusions and BS but there are some tidbits there that are useful. And our friend AJ is having a very nice argument regarding the need for "room conditioning" that I'm dying to see concluded. H/A isn't all "music is incidental" and "everything sounds the same"... but I do admit to getting quite a belly-laugh out of most of it.
      - RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface - andy19191 14:19:33 09/30/09 (10)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 08:03:19
        
        > That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface
        
        So on the surface we have an unpleasant, unintelligent bigot but under the surface we have... I notice that you have not said what we have and I am not sure I want to go there anyway!
        
        > As for Richard [...] I hope he's happy at H/A - and he should be
        > because he's among like minded people.
        
        I am not so sure that he is. Driving off unwanted audiophile silliness and audiophile bashing are not the same thing. The former is a requirement for the site to survive in its present form (like keeping DBTs out of the cable asylum) but I would judge that the latter is unwanted by most but it seems to be growing. The problem is not really to do with audiophiles but an influx of people that want to bash audiophiles like Arnold B., JJ and Richard and a small number of regulars.
        
        > And our friend AJ is having a very nice argument regarding the need for
        > "room conditioning" that I'm dying to see concluded.
        
        Yes he has revealed himself to be a bit faith based when it comes to acoustics. I am guessing this is from following some of Linkwitz's writings on the subject bu the latter has demonstrated a willingness to adapt to new evidence/information and so...
        
        So, when thinly-disguised audiophile hater, with the only... - carcass93 09:44:00 10/01/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by andy19191 on September 30, 2009 at 14:19:33
        
        ... wrinkle in his brain made by the cap he's wearing, proclaims himself impartial "audiophile behavior observer", we just take his word for it. Right...
        
        Gosh, I sincerely wish there was somebody on "the other side" worth talking to...
        
        RE: So, when thinly-disguised audiophile hater, with the only... - kerr 13:03:27 10/01/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: So, when thinly-disguised audiophile hater, with the only... posted by carcass93 on October 01, 2009 at 09:44:00
        
        > Gosh, I sincerely wish there was somebody on "the other side" worth talking to... <
        
        There is. Those people just stay well away from here. An R/E friend of mine, after my telling him about some of the BS that's spouted here about R/E's being "it all sounds the same" people, once told me that my computer has an "off" button and I should push it before wasting my time on this site. But he did surmise that such people are probably the reason there is so much recorded crap out there these days.
        
        I should listen to him but this place is like a car wreck. I want to look away, but I just can't....
        
        Yeah... When professionals discuss online top-of-the-line Lavry vs. Crane Song AD/DAs,... - carcass93 14:26:06 10/01/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: So, when thinly-disguised audiophile hater, with the only... posted by kerr on October 01, 2009 at 13:03:27
        
        ... both worth many thousands of dollars, they apparently do so only because they want to show off (or they like how the boxes look) - it all sounds the same still.
        
        Edits: 10/01/09
        
        RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface - theaudiohobby 20:52:50 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by andy19191 on September 30, 2009 at 14:19:33
        
        > > I am guessing this is from following some of Linkwitz's writings on the subject but the latter has demonstrated a willingness to adapt to new evidence/information and so...
        You certainly know your onions... By the way, has anybody ever accused you of being very patronising ;^)?
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Edits: 10/01/09
        
        RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface - kerr 17:09:38 09/30/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by andy19191 on September 30, 2009 at 14:19:33
        
        > but under the surface we have <
        
        ...someone who got as much as he gave. I've been around here for quite awhile and, all that time considered, the bashing has gone both ways. And I'm not talking about just the two in question.
        
        > but an influx of people that want to bash audiophiles like Arnold B., JJ and Richard and a small number of regulars. <
        
        At H/A??? Admittedly, I haven't spent a lot of time there yet but Arnie and JJ appear larger than life from what I have seen. I consider Arnie in particular to be well beyond the fringe, which is in keeping with what I see as the main thrust of the forum. And your use of the term "audiophile" for those two would seem to be in conflict with your earlier, less than complimentary description of it. Or are you some kind of island in this battle?
        
        > Yes he has revealed himself to be a bit faith based <
        
        As is everyone beholden to one faith or another. The sensible person can tell in which areas his faith is unsupported and in which his faith has been rewarded by facts.
        
        If you're right about "got as much as he gave", that only means... - carcass93 09:58:35 10/01/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 17:09:38
        
        ... that I'm not giving enough.
        
        Will work on that - promise.
        
        Thanks! - kerr 10:08:11 10/01/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: If you're right about "got as much as he gave", that only means... posted by carcass93 on October 01, 2009 at 09:58:35
        
        Now I have to clean the Pepsi out of my keyboard! :)
        
        Don't worry, man - few people can reduce someone to a quivering mass of demented insecurity the way you can! LOL
        
        On different subject - bought some "cheap" single malts recently in Duty Free shop abroad. - carcass93 10:45:11 10/01/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks! posted by kerr on October 01, 2009 at 10:08:11
        
        - Aberfeldy 12
        - Glendronach 12
        - Aberlour 15 Double cask (haven't seen this one in stores in NJ or PA).
        
        Of these, Aberlour is of course the most impressive, probably on par with 16 y.o. I had tried before. Then Aberfeldy, and the most generic is Glendronach. None of these probably is your cup of tea .. err... glass of scotch.
        
        I've not done much experimenting lately - kerr 10:57:08 10/01/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: On different subject - bought some "cheap" single malts recently in Duty Free shop abroad. posted by carcass93 on October 01, 2009 at 10:45:11
        
        Just been sticking with the old familiars Highland Park, Talisker, Lagavulin and an occasional Glenmorangie. I've actually been drinking more Armagnac lately, as I got hooked on XO-grade cognac which I can't afford. Armagnac is less expensive and still comes in XO.
        
        for some one who claims to be a disinterested observer - Analog Scott 15:58:18 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by andy19191 on September 30, 2009 at 14:19:33
        
        You sure do seem to have a keen interest in the various personalities. Not to mention a pretty clear belief system.
      - "very nice argument" - I trust you don't mean as in "being nice" (but that's to be expected). - carcass93 08:56:13 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That would be people that aren't looking beneath the surface posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 08:03:19
        
        A post by "Patsoe" there makes most sense to me - room nodes don't coexist with "accuracy", so AJ's argument is at least partially faulty (more like completely, in my opinion).
        
        I meant "interesting" - kerr 09:18:42 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "very nice argument" - I trust you don't mean as in "being nice" (but that's to be expected). posted by carcass93 on September 30, 2009 at 08:56:13
        
        I thought it was an interesting argument, and one that I've never heard before. I make no comment on its accuracy. I'd have to say I'm a believer in "room nodes don't coexist with accuracy" but I'm guessing AJ has more to say on the subject. The guy builds and alters speakers so I'd have to say that gives him a leg and two arms up on me, and I'm curious what else he comes up with.
    - Fine collection of fantasies, guesses and lies in one short post. Keep it up. N/T - carcass93 08:00:55 09/30/09 (0)
      N/T
- What I find revealing is this quote - E-Stat 16:54:23 09/28/09 (6)
  " I don't care that much about the music - it is merely incidental..."
  
  They are in a different world than I.
  
  rw
  - Well at least they are being honest! - Don Till 11:05:32 09/30/09 (5)
    As opposed to many of us who claim "it's all about the music" when so obviously there's much more to it then that.
    - Are you being honest? I kind of doubt that... - carcass93 12:41:07 09/30/09 (2)
      Otherwise, it's difficult to explain your "I'll side with any scum, as long as it shares the same beliefs that I do" position.
      
      Case in point: posts by your favorite "well-spoken" piece of dumbshit Peter H-son in this thread, and your defending him.
      - .Right on par - Don Till 18:19:49 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Are you being honest? I kind of doubt that... posted by carcass93 on September 30, 2009 at 12:41:07
        
        "Otherwise, it's difficult to explain your "I'll side with any scum, as long as it shares the same beliefs that I do" position."
        
        I'm a subjectivist and am into rock music much like you yet I think you're about the biggest waste of bandwidth posting in this forum.
        
        So much for your reasoning.
        
        "I'm a subjectivist " - if you say so... - carcass93 08:23:16 10/01/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: .Right on par posted by Don Till on September 30, 2009 at 18:19:49
        
        But to me, you're just another unintelligent person that regularly disgraces this forum with meaningless, useless blathering, with the main objective seemingly to contradict anything and anyone.
        And by the way, I'm not into ROCK music (at least, not into what is commonly considered rock music). Your routine talking about something you have no idea about just confirms my point above.
        
        Edits: 10/01/09
    - RE: Well at least they are being honest! - kerr 12:37:20 09/30/09 (1)
      > As opposed to many of us who claim "it's all about the music" when so obviously there's much more to it then that. <
      
      There's an old saw about the audiophile with the $300K system, every tweak imaginable, room treatments up the wazoo, supports every audio mag and goes to every show, and has 20 audiophile LP's that make up his entire music collection. I don't need to mention the titles of the LP's - you already know the titles.
      
      At any rate, I met such a person a couple of years ago (I thought the story was made up!). The REALLY funny thing was that he rarely turned the stereo on during the short time I knew him and said that he probably spent less than an hour a week listening to music. I honestly don't believe that the staunchest "objectivist" cares that little for music.
      
      There are nutbars on both sides of the debate.
      - RE: Well at least they are being honest! - Don Till 18:24:07 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Well at least they are being honest! posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 12:37:20
        
        I know a guy something like that but his rig was somewhere around ten grand. He had some Near speakers and the damn things sounded so bad on so many recordings there were only a few worthy of being played through them. He tried to tell me his system was too good for most recordings so he only had few, the cream of the crop, the best ones.
        
        Whatever people believe what they want to believe or at least what their dealer told them.
- The DBT pseudoscientists are even crazier than we hobbyists are...(nt) - mkuller 16:47:08 09/28/09 (82)
  (nt)
  - RE: The DBT pseudoscientists are even crazier than we hobbyists are...(nt) - Peter H-son 08:53:14 09/30/09 (72)
    What is "DBT pseudoscientists"?
    
    Nobody is dumber that the idiots here.
    
    There is no difference whatsoever between the audio mystics and the wackjobs in this video
    
    "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
    --Charles Darwin
    - I BELIEVE!!! - morricab 14:34:56 09/30/09 (0)
      Now, send me your credit card...
    - Looks like your posts below have been deleted... - mkuller 09:58:16 09/30/09 (1)
      ...who's the idiot now?
      - RE: Looks like your posts below have been deleted... - Peter H-son 10:37:14 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Looks like your posts below have been deleted... posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 09:58:16
        
        "Looks like your posts below have been deleted..."
        
        Then you know more than I do.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
    - I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - kerr 09:30:09 09/30/09 (65)
      I'm so dumb, I don't even know the definition of "audio mystic"! But even I know that some cables, amps, preamps etc sound different than others! ;)
      - RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Peter H-son 09:44:08 09/30/09 (64)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 09:30:09
        
        "But even I know that some cables, amps, preamps etc sound different than others! ;)"
        
        That is a fallacy. A piece of wire and an amplifier are very different things. I have not said a word about the latter.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - kerr 10:07:26 09/30/09 (55)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 09:44:08
        
        Then say something now. You attacked us - what is your weapon?
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Peter H-son 10:28:03 09/30/09 (53)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 10:07:26
        
        "You attacked us - what is your weapon?"
        
        Is that to me? I attacked nobody. I defend.
        
        This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        "This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science." um...no - Analog Scott 11:41:39 09/30/09 (14)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:28:03
        
        It is a critique of a lunitic fringe that pretends to be skeptics, critical thinkers and scientific.
        
        RE: "This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science." um...no - Peter H-son 11:45:50 09/30/09 (13)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science." um...no posted by Analog Scott on September 30, 2009 at 11:41:39
        
        Being called "lunitic fringe" by your kind is a badge of honor.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        Edits: 09/30/09
        
        "Being called "lunitic fringe" by your kind is a badge of honor." - Analog Scott 13:26:33 09/30/09 (12)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science." um...no posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 11:45:50
        
        Huh?
        
        "My kind?" what would that be?
        
        Who said anything about you? I was refering to the lunitic fringe on Hydrogen Audio. I'm talkin about the folks that would say you suffer from a mental illness and need treatment because of your beliefs about audio. Don't think so? Tell ya what. Go to Hydrogen Audio and post your veiws about the levels of resolution of vinyl vs. redbook CD. I dare you. then after you have been accused of being anti science, a true believer and mentally ill get back to me about how those folks are real skeptics, and defenders of science and rational thought.
        
        RE: "Being called "lunitic fringe" by your kind is a badge of honor." - Peter H-son 10:31:31 10/01/09 (11)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Being called "lunitic fringe" by your kind is a badge of honor." posted by Analog Scott on September 30, 2009 at 13:26:33
        
        "Go to Hydrogen Audio and post your veiws about the levels of resolution of vinyl vs. redbook CD."
        
        Why would I do that? I do not force the issue here or anywhere else. Maybe I have just run into sucky CD players? Maybe the digital fans have only heard sucky CD players?
        
        That's not important.
        
        You have people here making outlandish claims. That is not so bad. But then they resort to name-calling and try to bully people into believing their nonsense. How does that make them different from ANY religious fundamentalist?
        
        They believe their failure is the failure of science.
        
        Passing a DBT is the easiest thing in the world, if there is a difference.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        DBT -- opamps (Open in New Window)
        
        "Why would I do that?" - Analog Scott 13:43:40 10/01/09 (10)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Being called "lunitic fringe" by your kind is a badge of honor." posted by Peter H-son on October 01, 2009 at 10:31:31
        
        to get a better understanding of exactly who and what is actually being criticized. You jumped into this thread seemingly thinking it was about you. I assure you it wasn't.
        
        "You have people here making outlandish claims. That is not so bad. But then they resort to name-calling and try to bully people into believing their nonsense. How does that make them different from ANY religious fundamentalist?"
        
        I don't think the claims about some of the folks at Hydrogenaudio are particularly outlandish. I think if you were to get a first hand taste you would find yourself in agreement with much of what is being said here about those folks.
        
        As for name calling... it does not make one a fundamentalist. You have done your fair share of it on this thread.
        
        "Passing a DBT is the easiest thing in the world, if there is a difference."
        
        This thread isn't about passing dbts or about cables or about you. It is about a particular group of lunitic fringe objectivists and their distortions of real science and of subjectivists and of audio in general. We are talking about a group of people that would call *you* mentally ill and in need of mental treatment because of your beliefs about audio. I only suggested you engage them in a conversation about the resolution of vinyl vs. Redbook CD so you could get a first hand taste of what it is we are criticizing in this thread.
        
        RE: "Why would I do that?" - Peter H-son 06:30:55 10/02/09 (9)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Why would I do that?" posted by Analog Scott on October 01, 2009 at 13:43:40
        
        "You jumped into this thread seemingly thinking it was about you. I assure you it wasn't."
        
        Two wrongs. I'm not a narcissist. I do not think the world revolves on me.
        
        "I don't think the claims about some of the folks at Hydrogenaudio are particularly outlandish."
        
        Nor do I. I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists.
        
        "As for name calling... it does not make one a fundamentalist."
        
        Not what I said at all. I said that carcass93 and his ilks are bullies. If you do not submit to their belief system, you are a coward and should go fuck yourself. His words, not mine.
        
        "This thread isn't about passing dbts or about cables or about you. It is about a particular group of lunitic fringe objectivists and their distortions of real science and of subjectivists and of audio in general."
        
        I say pigs can fly. You say No. I then say you are a lunitic fringe objectivist.
        
        I do not think pigs can fly any more than I believe the cable fetishists' claims. The only difference between those claims is BELIEF.
        
        A Christian is likely to believe somebody who says Jesus has talked to him. The Christian is far less likely to believe somebody who says Buddha has talked to him.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        Pathological science (Open in New Window)
        
        "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Analog Scott 07:56:28 10/02/09 (8)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Why would I do that?" posted by Peter H-son on October 02, 2009 at 06:30:55
        
        Then you posted to the worng thread. There was no talk about cables until you brought it up. The thread was about some folks on Hydrogen Audio. You jumped in and started slinging insults. Do you walk into a bar and punch someone in the face and then feel outraged and wronged when you get punched back? How is it that you, the guy who fired the first insult, have any business acting all righteous about others insulting you? Were you just in need of some attention? Did you think you were contributing in some way? why are you even posting on this thread?
        
        RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Peter H-son 09:10:04 10/02/09 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Analog Scott on October 02, 2009 at 07:56:28
        
        "Then you posted to the worng thread."
        
        Not at all.
        
        "There was no talk about cables until you brought it up."
        
        Yes, there was. "Some poor soul decided it would be good idea to post results of his positive test of power cords on HydrogenAudio."
        
        "The thread was about some folks on Hydrogen Audio."
        
        Almost. The thread is about the folks on Hydrogen Audio WHO DO NOT SHARE THE BELIEF OF THE CABLE FETISHISTS. If the folks at Hydrogen Audio would have bought the cable fetishists' superstitious beliefs, there would have been no thread.
        
        I could go to the Hydrogen Audio forum (I assume it's a forum) and start a thread saying pigs can fly. I'm sure the folks there would call me an idiot. Then I could come here and bitch about it. Same thing and just as retarded.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Analog Scott 12:57:01 10/02/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Peter H-son on October 02, 2009 at 09:10:04
        
        > > > Then you posted to the worng thread.> > >
        
        > > Not at all.> >
        
        > > > There was no talk about cables until you brought it up.> > >
        
        > > Yes, there was. "Some poor soul decided it would be good idea to post results of his positive test of power cords on HydrogenAudio."> >
        
        yeah, that is what they do there. but apparently it's only OK if the results match the beliefs. Apparently this is something you have in common with the nut jobs on Hydrogen Audio. no wonder you took it personally. here is a clue about real science. There is no cherry picking based on whether or not one *likes* the results.
        
        > > > The thread was about some folks on Hydrogen Audio.> > >
        
        > > Almost.> >
        
        Nope. It was exactly about them.
        
        > > The thread is about the folks on Hydrogen Audio WHO DO NOT SHARE THE BELIEF OF THE CABLE FETISHISTS. If the folks at Hydrogen Audio would have bought the cable fetishists' superstitious beliefs, there would have been no thread.> >
        
        In a way you are right. It was about them pretending to be scientific when if fact they were acting like religious zealots who only embrace science when it conforms to their religious beliefs. Apparently you endorse such behaviour.
        
        > > I could go to the Hydrogen Audio forum (I assume it's a forum) and start a thread saying pigs can fly. I'm sure the folks there would call me an idiot. Then I could come here and bitch about it. Same thing and just as retarded.> >
        
        Or you could go there and post your beliefs about vinyl resolution vs. Redbook CD and see what it is like to be faced with someone like you. I think you owe to yourself to walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. Maybe you will learn a thing or two about arrogance and self righteousness.
        
        RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Peter H-son 06:39:20 10/03/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Analog Scott on October 02, 2009 at 12:57:01
        
        "yeah, that is what they do there. but apparently it's only OK if the results match the beliefs. Apparently this is something you have in common with the nut jobs on Hydrogen Audio. no wonder you took it personally. here is a clue about real science. There is no cherry picking based on whether or not one *likes* the results."
        
        False. There is no such result. Hydrogen Audio has all the science on its side. The only thing you cable fetishists have is your superstitious belief. You lose.
        
        "Or you could go there and post your beliefs about vinyl resolution vs. Redbook CD and see what it is like to be faced with someone like you. I think you owe to yourself to walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. Maybe you will learn a thing or two about arrogance and self righteousness."
        
        That makes no sense at all. That's like asking me to become a Creationist so I can experience what it feels like to get my ass handed to me by science. I have no more issues with science than I have with Hydrogen Audio.
        
        You are committing the same fallacy as all the other wackjobs on this forum.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Analog Scott 09:36:26 10/03/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Peter H-son on October 03, 2009 at 06:39:20
        
        "False. There is no such result. Hydrogen Audio has all the science on its side. The only thing you cable fetishists have is your superstitious belief. You lose."
        
        You sound like a creationist talking about radiometric dating. There *was* such a result. It was reported on the thread at Hydrogenaudio. How do you like them cherries? We know which one's you are picking.
        
        What sicence is on their side? Do tell us what at Hydrogen audio has ever been published in a scientific peer reviewed journal. Do you know how real science actually works? Your assertion that they have real science on their side strongly suggests otherwise.
        
        RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." - Peter H-son 13:33:14 10/03/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Analog Scott on October 03, 2009 at 09:36:26
        
        "It was reported on the thread at Hydrogenaudio."
        
        By the likes of you.
        
        Wackjobs on this forum have given us "Scientific evidence of power cables reducing signal distortion."
        
        That is NOT science.
        
        "Do tell us what at Hydrogen audio has ever been published in a scientific peer reviewed journal."
        
        You really are that stupid, aren't you?
        
        You do not need science to reject claims that pigs can fly or that the earth is flat. That is not how science works.
        
        YOU are the ones making outlandish claims. The burden of proof is on your side. The rest of us have no reason to believe you until you do. Why would anyone believe you more than the people in the Penn & Teller videos? You are all the same as far as I'm concerned. Neither one of you has a skeptical bone in his body.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        Well argued - Analog Scott 17:43:55 10/03/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Peter H-son on October 03, 2009 at 13:33:14
        
        as well as any religious zealot ever argues their position. Let's review some of the highlights of your insightful arguments.
        
        "By the likes of you.
        
        Wackjobs on this forum have given us 'Scientific evidence of power cables reducing signal distortion.'"
        
        > > Do tell us what at Hydrogen audio has ever been published in a scientific peer reviewed journal.> >
        
        "You really are that stupid, aren't you?
        
        You do not need science to reject claims that pigs can fly or that the earth is flat. That is not how science works."
        
        "YOU are the ones making outlandish claims. The burden of proof is on your side. The rest of us have no reason to believe you until you do. Why would anyone believe you more than the people in the Penn & Teller videos? You are all the same as far as I'm concerned. Neither one of you has a skeptical bone in his body."
        
        Why should I bring a sword to this battle when you are some eager to fall on your own?
        I can't say I have seen any better examples of the logical fallacy of ad hominem. Bravo!
        
        He apparently thinks that "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" swing, that started the mayhem,... - carcass93 08:11:49 10/02/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "I'm talking about the outlandish claims made by the wire fetishists." posted by Analog Scott on October 02, 2009 at 07:56:28
        
        ... is fine, as long as it's him doing the swinging.
        
        Truly selective perception and memory, in best objectivist tradition...
        
        RE: He apparently thinks that "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" swing, that started the mayhem,... - Peter H-son 06:55:40 10/03/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: He apparently thinks that "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" swing, that started the mayhem,... posted by carcass93 on October 02, 2009 at 08:11:49
        
        "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" was a response. Before that I tried to figure out what this thread is about. The initial post made little sense to me. More precisely, why on this forum? The true believers on the cable forum would surely be much more receptive.
        
        But you knew who the "idiots" were.
        
        You come here and insult the intelligense of everybody with your outlandish claims and superstitious belief. Then you get insulted because we are not stupid enough to buy your nonsense.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - kerr 10:46:46 09/30/09 (36)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:28:03
        
        > Is that to me? I attacked nobody. I defend. <
        
        Ok. What's your defense?
        
        > This thread is an attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science. <
        
        How so? You seem to be ok with sonic difference in amps and preamps but stop at cables? As mkuller asked, are you saying that it is physically impossible to change the sound of a working cable? Your claim regarding this thread is noted but unsupported. So, support it. I'm listening.
        
        Man, you don't understand... you HAVE TO PROVE something to him. N/T - carcass93 11:20:37 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 10:46:46
        
        N/T
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Donald North 11:15:17 09/30/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 10:46:46
        
        First, I do believe everything should sound different. That being said, I suspect some differences are below human audibility. Of course, this threshold varies from person to person. I personally have heard greater differences among preamps and amplifiers than cables and accordingly, have spent greater resources towards them.
        
        Donald North
        
        A perfectly logical approach... - mkuller 11:18:24 09/30/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Donald North on September 30, 2009 at 11:15:17
        
        ...some might even say "scientific".
        
        RE: A perfectly logical approach... - Peter H-son 11:35:04 09/30/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: A perfectly logical approach... posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 11:18:24
        
        > > ...some might even say "scientific".> >
        
        Then they would be wrong.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        Looks like you also have... - mkuller 11:48:48 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: A perfectly logical approach... posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 11:35:04
        
        ...no sense of humor or the ability to recognize sarcasm.
        
        Oh, but you know "science" when you see it...
        
        RE: Looks like you also have... - Peter H-son 11:58:58 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Looks like you also have... posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 11:48:48
        
        > > Oh, but you know "science" when you see it...> >
        
        No, I do not know science when I see it. Plato was a bore, to quote Nietzsche.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Peter H-son 11:10:43 09/30/09 (29)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 10:46:46
        
        "How so? You seem to be ok with sonic difference in amps and preamps but stop at cables? As mkuller asked, are you saying that it is physically impossible to change the sound of a working cable? Your claim regarding this thread is noted but unsupported. So, support it. I'm listening."
        
        Putting words in the mouths of people show extremely bad taste. I have said NONE of those things. I have made NO claim.
        
        I stop nowhere.
        
        It can be hard telling any difference between amplifiers in blind tests: The Blind leading the Deaf
        
        If you want to sell me that cables make a difference, all you have to do is prove it.
        
        If you do not want to prove it, fine.
        
        I don't go to the cable forum proving to them they are wrong. All I ask in return is that you do the same and post this thread where it belongs.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - kerr 12:30:05 09/30/09 (25)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 11:10:43
        
        > All I ask in return is that you do the same and post this thread where it belongs <
        
        It belongs where it is. I'm asking you if there are scientific reasons that prove that no working 10 ft speaker cable or 1 m interconnect can ever sound different from another working 10 ft speaker cable or 1m interconnect. I say "working" to stipulate that the cable in fact moves the signal from point A to point B to differentiate from others using the word "broken"... as in that oft-heard declaration, "all cables sound alike unless one is broken".
        
        How is this not a technical/scientific question? I'm not stating here that cables absolutely make a difference; I'm asking if you believe that they cannot.
        
        > If you want to sell me that cables make a difference, all you have to do is prove it. <
        
        I don't. It makes no difference to me if you believe it or not. Even if I posted my proof, you wouldn't believe it (not that you necessarily should). It's up to you to prove it to yourself if you have any interest.
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Pat D 09:32:07 10/02/09 (24)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 12:30:05
        
        One cannot prove a universal negative with statistics. The problems are to show that audible differences exist and under what conditions.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - kerr 10:21:44 10/02/09 (23)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Pat D on October 02, 2009 at 09:32:07
        
        > One cannot prove a universal negative with statistics. <
        
        Where's the evidence that it's a universal negative? That's what I'm asking. Why do you need proof of audible differences? There must be some reason that your fallback position is that cables can't sound different (excluding length, guage and the usual suspects). What is that reason? Why is it so hard to believe that different cables affect sound in different ways?
        
        RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true - Pat D 14:11:10 10/03/09 (22)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on October 02, 2009 at 10:21:44
        
        You're the one that wanted proof for a universal negative. I quote from above:
        
        "I'm asking you if there are scientific reasons that prove that no working 10 ft speaker cable or 1 m interconnect can ever sound different from another working 10 ft speaker cable or 1m interconnect."
        
        As I pointed out, the problems are to show that there are any audible differences and under what conditions.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        "the problems are to show that there are any audible differences and under what conditions." - Analog Scott 10:44:07 10/04/09 (21)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Pat D on October 03, 2009 at 14:11:10
        
        I guess we all have our crosses to bear. This is not a "problem" for me. I enjoy my perceptions despite the lack of scientific support for them. If you can't do the same I feel sorry for you.
        
        No one says you can't enjoy your perceptions. - Pat D 18:59:24 10/05/09 (20)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "the problems are to show that there are any audible differences and under what conditions." posted by Analog Scott on October 04, 2009 at 10:44:07
        
        I do point out that Kerr asked a scientific question.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        looks to me like he asked you... - Analog Scott 08:29:21 10/06/09 (19)
        
        In Reply to: RE: No one says you can't enjoy your perceptions. posted by Pat D on October 05, 2009 at 18:59:24
        
        "Why do you need proof of audible differences?"
        
        RE: looks to me like he asked you... - Pat D 12:16:07 10/06/09 (18)
        
        In Reply to: RE: looks to me like he asked you... posted by Analog Scott on October 06, 2009 at 08:29:21
        
        That's easy: to see if claims of audible differences can be substantiated.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        Then we come full circle - Analog Scott 14:44:16 10/06/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: looks to me like he asked you... posted by Pat D on October 06, 2009 at 12:16:07
        
        Kerr asks:
        "Why do you need proof of audible differences?"
        Pat answers:
        "That's easy: to see if claims of audible differences can be substantiated."
        
        I guess we all have our crosses to bear. This is not a "problem" for me. I enjoy my perceptions despite the lack of scientific support for them. If you can't do the same I feel sorry for you. You seem to "need" scientific validation for your subjective perceptions. Or is it you think others "need" to prove these things to you? They don't.
        
        gosh I feel like I am repeating myself here.
        
        Edits: 10/06/09
        
        You are totally confused. - Pat D 18:37:16 10/06/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Then we come full circle posted by Analog Scott on October 06, 2009 at 14:44:16
        
        What has a desire to see if claims of audible differences can be substantiated have to do with how one enjoys music, performs music, and so on?
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        You aren't getting it and that makes me confused...... - Analog Scott 23:16:39 10/06/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are totally confused. posted by Pat D on October 06, 2009 at 18:37:16
        
        yeah right. Is this just your last word fettish rearing it's ugly head? You aren't even trying to fake having an argument.
        
        "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." - Pat D 12:57:39 10/08/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You aren't getting it and that makes me confused...... posted by Analog Scott on October 06, 2009 at 23:16:39
        
        That's what this forum is supposed to be about. Do you have a problem with that?
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        No I have no problem with that - Analog Scott 10:48:01 10/10/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." posted by Pat D on October 08, 2009 at 12:57:39
        
        i do have a problem with your dishonesty though. If you ever decide to stop the bullshit and actually have a technical or scientific discussion about audio it would be quite refreshing.
        
        The answer is equally easy: it can, if you're willing to substantiate it for yourself. - carcass93 14:02:26 10/06/09 (12)
        
        In Reply to: RE: looks to me like he asked you... posted by Pat D on October 06, 2009 at 12:16:07
        
        But you are not, are you?
        
        Life is too short. - Pat D 18:31:05 10/06/09 (11)
        
        In Reply to: RE: The answer is equally easy: it can, if you're willing to substantiate it for yourself. posted by carcass93 on October 06, 2009 at 14:02:26
        
        I am too busy listening to music, performing music, doing philosophical research, taking courses, as well as helping out with the house work, cooking, lawn work, shopping, and so on.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        Where does posting silly demands of others for "proof" on this forum fit into that? - carcass93 08:29:33 10/07/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Life is too short. posted by Pat D on October 06, 2009 at 18:31:05
        
        Let me guess - right between doing philosophical research and taking courses, right?
        
        I only ask if there is proof of extraordinary claims. - Pat D 10:37:34 10/07/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Where does posting silly demands of others for "proof" on this forum fit into that? posted by carcass93 on October 07, 2009 at 08:29:33
        
        If you interpret that as a demand, that's your problem.
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        Asked and aswered - there is. Just not for you. N/T - carcass93 12:53:41 10/07/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I only ask if there is proof of extraordinary claims. posted by Pat D on October 07, 2009 at 10:37:34
        
        N/T
        
        You haven't indicated any proofs. (nt) - Pat D 16:03:47 10/10/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Asked and aswered - there is. Just not for you. N/T posted by carcass93 on October 07, 2009 at 12:53:41
        
        .
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        Well, you have to admit he has a point - kerr 09:09:20 10/07/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Where does posting silly demands of others for "proof" on this forum fit into that? posted by carcass93 on October 07, 2009 at 08:29:33
        
        Imagine the time requirement to provide proof! Untold multitudes of tests run by Tom Nousaine personally, an AES peer reviewed paper etc etc. That's a major investment in time. I guess it's really silly to make demands for proof, since nothing short of the above will suffice.
        
        I'm comfortable in the knowledge that not everything sounds the same and I guess the "objectivists" are comfortable with their beliefs. All's right with the world.
        
        More like too busy posting demands for evidence on this forum... - morricab 01:52:15 10/07/09 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Life is too short. posted by Pat D on October 06, 2009 at 18:31:05
        
        rather than finding out for yourself.
        
        I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about what I can hear. (nt) - Pat D 10:32:29 10/07/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: More like too busy posting demands for evidence on this forum... posted by morricab on October 07, 2009 at 01:52:15
        
        .
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        RE: I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about what I can hear. (nt) - morricab 00:54:04 10/08/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about what I can hear. (nt) posted by Pat D on October 07, 2009 at 10:32:29
        
        What is extraordinary about hearing differences in cables? Maybe you don't have "proof" you can hear the difference but I am sure that even you have experimented with cables and found at least subjectively that there is a difference, no? Time for you to pony up and tell me what you "think" you hear. I am not interested in you proving what you can or cannot hear at this point.
        
        What CAN you hear the difference between?
        
        I will go first if it makes it easier for you:
        
        I can hear the differences clearly between speakers, room treatments, amps, preamps, sources (eg. different DACS/transports or different phonostages/cartridges/turntables), interconnect cables, speaker cables, digital cables, power conditioning or none but not so much with power cables and therefore I have about zero invested there. I don't hear conclusive evidence about tuning feet or racks either and so I have very little invested there as well.
        
        "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." - Pat D 13:43:47 10/08/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about what I can hear. (nt) posted by morricab on October 08, 2009 at 00:54:04
        
        Does what people think they hear qualify?
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        RE: "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." - morricab 02:26:35 10/09/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." posted by Pat D on October 08, 2009 at 13:43:47
        
        Why not?
        
        Ah, there's the question! - kerr 04:46:07 10/08/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about what I can hear. (nt) posted by morricab on October 08, 2009 at 00:54:04
        
        > What is extraordinary about hearing differences in cables? <
        
        That's the question I was trying to ask earlier. Why is this considered extraordinary? Either there are thousands of "extraordinary" people that can hear differences in cables, or it's simply not an extraordinary feat.
        
        I'll take your list and add the words "in some instances" to almost all of them. I can't always discern differences between certain components. That doesn't mean they aren't there; it just means I haven't been able to pick them out (talking about sighted auditions here).
        
        Can you show me evidence... - mkuller 11:21:14 09/30/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 11:10:43
        
        ...that forced choice DBTs do not remove small audible differences?
        
        Validation and sensitivity.
        
        If it was real science, you could.
        
        Audio DBTs are at best pseudoscience and at worst parlor games to make audible differences disappear.
        
        RE: Can you show me evidence... - Peter H-son 11:32:25 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Can you show me evidence... posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 11:21:14
        
        "Can you show me evidence that forced choice DBTs do not remove small audible differences?"
        
        What?
        
        "If it was real science, you could."
        
        Gibberish.
        
        "Audio DBTs are at best pseudoscience and at worst parlor games to make audible differences disappear."
        
        You are a wackjob.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        You got nothing - who's the wackjob? (nt) - mkuller 11:36:49 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Can you show me evidence... posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 11:32:25
        
        (nt)
        
        "attack on reason, skepticism, critical thinking and science" - you're wrong again. - carcass93 10:44:46 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:28:03
        
        If it's attack on anything - that would be on ignorance, closed-mindedness, pathological cheapness, and stupidity. All demostrated by cretins like yourself.
        
        His two weapons are fear and surpise and - Analog Scott 10:16:29 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 10:07:26
        
        a fanatical devotion to the catholic church! Start again..... among our weapons....
        
        What fallacy? - Tony Lauck 10:05:49 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 09:44:08
        
        "That is a fallacy. A piece of wire and an amplifier are very different things. I have not said a word about the latter."
        
        I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. So we can all be on the same page, please tell us more precisely what statement you believe to be fallacious. It would also help if you included your reasons for this belief.
        
        Tony Lauck
        
        "Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
        
        So if a peice of wire has different... - mkuller 09:59:53 09/30/09 (6)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, it's true posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 09:44:08
        
        ...R, C, L than another - will it sound different?
        
        RE: So if a peice of wire has different... - Peter H-son 10:17:59 09/30/09 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: So if a peice of wire has different... posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 09:59:53
        
        "will it sound different?"
        
        On one extreme we have those who believe EVERYTHING makes a difference.
        
        I do not believe that everyhing makes a difference. But at SOME level things start to make a difference. As far as we know, traditional cables do not reach this level.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        "As far as we know" - you don't know too far then. BTW, "we" - you got helminths? - carcass93 10:35:18 09/30/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: So if a peice of wire has different... posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:17:59
        
        Try to understand - you don't know ANYTHING, actually.
        
        RE: "As far as we know" - you don't know too far then. BTW, "we" - you got helminths? - Peter H-son 10:41:13 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "As far as we know" - you don't know too far then. BTW, "we" - you got helminths? posted by carcass93 on September 30, 2009 at 10:35:18
        
        Your kind only THINK you know.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        I thought their video was about the beliefs of the DBT pseudoscientists...(nt) - mkuller 10:58:00 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "As far as we know" - you don't know too far then. BTW, "we" - you got helminths? posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:41:13
        
        (nt)
        
        "As far as we know..." - you got a mouse in your pocket? (nt) - mkuller 10:29:06 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: So if a peice of wire has different... posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 10:17:59
        
        (nt)
        
        Judging by tone of his posts - it's helminths, indeed. Nasty ones, and lot of them. N/T - carcass93 11:22:30 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "As far as we know..." - you got a mouse in your pocket? (nt) posted by mkuller on September 30, 2009 at 10:29:06
        
        N/T
    - "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" - that's right, you're the dumbest of anti-audiophile idiots here. - carcass93 09:14:51 09/30/09 (2)
      Now - GFY.
      - RE: "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" - that's right, you're the dumbest of anti-audiophile idiots here. - Peter H-son 09:47:14 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" - that's right, you're the dumbest of anti-audiophile idiots here. posted by carcass93 on September 30, 2009 at 09:14:51
        
        Thanks for making MY point.
        
        "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
        --Charles Darwin
        
        You don't have a point. - carcass93 10:12:20 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Nobody is dumber that the idiots here" - that's right, you're the dumbest of anti-audiophile idiots here. posted by Peter H-son on September 30, 2009 at 09:47:14
        
        Some other things you apparently don't have, either:
        
        - audio-related knowledge or experience
        - manners
        - brains
        - balls
        - ability to follow simple directions (i.e. GFY)
  - Yeah, ironic talk about tribes, when his is the craziest .(nt) - Sordidman 10:35:06 09/29/09 (5)
    x
    
    Both sides of the river, there is bacteria; there must be meaning behind the moaning, is this living?
    - IMO both fringes are on even ground when it comes to craziness and vitrole. nt - Analog Scott 12:44:56 09/29/09 (4)
      nt
      - Perhaps, but... - mkuller 20:42:18 09/29/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: IMO both fringes are on even ground when it comes to craziness and vitrole. nt posted by Analog Scott on September 29, 2009 at 12:44:56
        
        ...let's take Andy1919, AJinFla and RBNG as the fringe and we well know their craziness here.
        
        Tell me about the craziness you see on the other side...
        
        Tell ya? Heck I'll show ya. - Analog Scott 08:05:26 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Perhaps, but... posted by mkuller on September 29, 2009 at 20:42:18
        
        Go to Stereophile forums, general rants and raves. Check out the "new angle on and old discussion."
        here is my position as stated on that thread
        "One of the many things I find so ironic about this whole thing is that I have no issue with people who freeze things, bring clocks into the room (clever or not) wear tinfoil hats or put tin foil all over their components or use any other tweek and claim that their system sounds better to them. I have no problem with that. That is a personal perception and if wearing a tinfoil hat makes your system sound better to you so be it. I'm certainly not against enhanced enjoyment of one's hobby. I don't ask people to ever prove their perceptions with blind tests double, single or triple. It's silly. It's about enjoyment of casual listening is it not? Fact is when we listen to our systems for the joy of listening to music we do so with our biases in full play. That is true whether one is an objectivist who has spent a lifetime doing ABX DBTs or subjectivist who thinks freezing a picture of a friend or family member makes the system sound better. Either way or anything in between the biases are all in play. That's a result being human. Live with it. You have no choice anyway.
        It's not enough for you to be right. The "enemy" must also be wrong. I have a fancy high end TT and tubed electronics.(go figure) I certainly "percieve" improved sound with these components. If JJ were to say that my percieved improvements were all bias based would that change my perceptions? I doubt it. I know my perceptions are affected by biases. Just like everyone else. It is what it is."
        And here are a few things others say about me and my POV on audio.
        
        "
        Another terrific post that debunks all that Scott has represented as his stance on this matter. What is so absurd (we could only wish for some small bit of irony from Scott) is that if Scott actually felt no animosity toward anyone who freezes "things" he wouldn't display such enmity toward May. Frezing "things" is not something May sells, it is given away free of charge. Therefore it can't be what anyone charges for their products that upsets Scott's apple cart. It isn't that Scott objects to the perceived results anyone achieves by freezing "things" - at least that's what he wants us to believe. The only real reason then that Scott should be so intent on insulting May is that he could not hear any improvement when his friend treated his system and room with Belt devices. He is therefore in the same boat with Buddha who also cannot hear the effectiveness of the Belt devices. And that's what really pisses off both of them."
        "I hear what you're saying, brother Jan. And I [i]too[/i] have considered the idea that Scott may not actually be human. I suspect he's one of those alien drones, like in The Terminator, who transmogrifies himself into a likening of anyone in his general vicinity, to further his agenda. Buddha says Geoff is a prankster, so the impressionable Scott internalizes this, and runs with it. Scott has so psyched himself up with this idea, that anything Geoff himself says, convinces him that he is right.
        [i]
        Geoff: "I used to sell my pebbles in a jar, but now I ship them in a plastic bag".
        Scott: "A-HA!!! So you ARE responsible for the crop circles in Kazakhstan!!! I KNEW it!! I just KNEW IT!!"
        [/i]
        Moreover, Buddha insults May, so Scott sees this and does just the same, insulting May in an irrational fashion, like as if she's personally responsible for every girl rejecting him throughout his formative years. And I don't think there's any doubt that if jj said it is a scientific fact that the moon landing never happened, Scott would be on a forum somewhere insisting to people that the moon hoax theory is true. So I realize the Scot-bot has no opinions of its own, but what I'm wondering is, if it can be reprogrammed to fight for audio good, instead of audio evil? To represent thoughtful, intelligent, progressiveness in the community, instead of mindless knee-jerk reactionism it was programmed for? I'm going to study the schematics of the Wheeler model tomorrow, and see if there is a way to access its flash bay. Will let you know. Or let's put it this way, if the Scot-bot starts posting about aligning his screws to earth or asking about the best fishing line for suspending his cables, assume that I've been succesful."
        
        "And then you called May a crook and the Belt concepts bullshit. Nicely done, Scotty!
        
        So, whether Orb finds it difficut to believe or not, many of us who have watched you bob and weave through this forum find it impossible to believe. You are just one more in the long line of holes who have insulted anyone who disagreed with you and then claimed you were the one making peace.
        
        Didn't buy the goods then and I'm not buying them now."
        There is much more but this shopuld give anyone a tatse of the lunitic fringe on the other side of the aisle.
        
        Edits: 09/30/09
        
        I'd forgotten that episode.... - robert young 11:46:24 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Tell ya? Heck I'll show ya. posted by Analog Scott on September 30, 2009 at 08:05:26
        
        but thanks for the reminder! Your stated position still reads as a breath of fresh air.
      - I hear that but - Sordidman 18:25:17 09/29/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: IMO both fringes are on even ground when it comes to craziness and vitrole. nt posted by Analog Scott on September 29, 2009 at 12:44:56
        
        I don't have a clear definition of what constitutes a fringe...
        
        Perhaps, someone who just blindly accepts marketing hyperbole vs the naysayer, "there can be no differences," RBNG type.
        
        I hope that I'm not thought of as being in either extreme.
        
        I do agree that sometimes the more passionate will set up lots of straw men to attack with....
        
        Cheers Analog
        
        Both sides of the river, there is bacteria; there must be meaning behind the moaning, is this living?
  - ...and they like their DBT's only when they give them expected results (nt) - kerr 16:54:05 09/28/09 (2)
    nt
    - double word (nt) - Analog Scott 08:21:16 09/29/09 (0)
      nt
    - Word (nt) - Donald North 17:06:00 09/28/09 (0)
      nt
It is very easy to understand their beliefs - E-Stat 07:05:35 09/27/09 (15)
when you understand they way they approach music - or not as it were. Here are some beliefs shared by more than one poster there:

"I expect a certain level of sound quality, but beyond that, it doesn't matter to me...I don't care that much about the music - it is merely incidental and I'll listen to anything (minimize country music please)."

That says it all. :)

rw
- Along the same lines - their systems (E. Winer responds to ajinfla): - carcass93 11:52:53 09/28/09 (12)
  Should it really surprise anybody, that they don't hear any differences on their "systems"?
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  QUOTE (ajinfla @ Sep 25 2009, 19:51)
  Might I inquire what speakers?
  
  My living room system is 5.1 surround with Mackie 624s, plus a killer SVS subwoofer with twin 12s - it's the size of a small refrigerator!
  
  My home studio has a pair of old-school type JBL 4430s. The big ones with the 15-inch woofer and bi-radial horn. They're bi-amp powered by a pair of Crown PowerBase amplifiers with just over 1 KW.
  
  --Ethan
  - Interestingly, AJinFLA already got into disagreement there (who could've thought?)... - carcass93 08:42:25 09/29/09 (9)
    ... with some decorated locals over necessity of acoustic treatments.
    
    The gist of it is that if one (ajinfla that is, yes in lower case now) already has ACCURATE speakers, he needs no stinkin' acoustic treatments ("band aids", in his words). Sure enough, Winer (bass traps purveyor) disagrees.
    
    Fun stuff...
    - He may get bounced for disagreeing - kerr 09:33:27 09/29/09 (8)
      They don't seem to tolerate deviation from the party line. But they've gotta save their spears for the subjectivists! This "LFO on LFO" violence must cease!!!!
      
      I'd have to go with the Whiner on this one, though. Speakers may be "accurate"; rooms aren't.
      - This "LFO on LFO" violence must cease!!!! - Analog Scott 10:32:04 09/29/09 (6)
        
        In Reply to: RE: He may get bounced for disagreeing posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 09:33:27
        
        brilliant. still cleaning the milk off my keyboard
        
        We can't have them fighting amongst themselves! - kerr 11:20:02 09/29/09 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: This "LFO on LFO" violence must cease!!!! posted by Analog Scott on September 29, 2009 at 10:32:04
        
        They need to save it for their mortal enemy, the Subjectivist! But fear not - our ears shall overcome their DBT's! Bartender! A bottle of your finest whiskey - and fresh horses for the men! Tonight we ride!!!!
        
        That's the - E-Stat 15:41:39 09/29/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: We can't have them fighting amongst themselves! posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 11:20:02
        
        observationalists if you please. :)
        
        I, too was amused when Adam got the response back from his "so, what speakers do you use" question. He was speechless as well!
        
        rw
        
        Gotta admit - kerr 15:53:54 09/29/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: That's the posted by E-Stat on September 29, 2009 at 15:41:39
        
        Ol' AJ has one hell of an interesting argument going on. I don't agree with him... or at least I didn't... and now I'm not so sure.
        
        And Ethan Winer is one lucky guy to have a skating rink in his living room! Or is it a disco? Whatever - if he doesn't, he's off to a great start with his system!
        
        Its definitely - E-Stat 16:24:33 09/29/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Gotta admit posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 15:53:54
        
        rockem' sockem' robots going on with El Nutto, Mr. Voodoo and Whiner!
        
        Whiner knocked El Nutto's block off with the "OMG, that is so wrong" post. :)
        
        rw
        
        Let's Go!!! - robert young 15:32:02 09/29/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: We can't have them fighting amongst themselves! posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 11:20:02
        
        I'm ready!!
        
        (Where are we going again, Kerr?)
        
        RE: Let's Go!!! - kerr 15:55:42 09/29/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Let's Go!!! posted by robert young on September 29, 2009 at 15:32:02
        
        Hey, I'm the idea guy! I need YOU to execute the plan!
        
        Ah crap, now I've forgotten the plan! E-Stat will have to provide the memory.
      - Absolutely. BTW, some stuff there is informative (especially if you haven't read it previous 100 times). - carcass93 09:48:25 09/29/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: He may get bounced for disagreeing posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 09:33:27
        
        For instance, exchange between RBNG and Winer over bass traps versus bass EQ.
  - Who said anything about a spigot? - E-Stat 16:59:04 09/28/09 (0)
    Waddaya say? I can't hear you!
    
    rw
  - RE: Along the same lines - their systems (E. Winer responds to ajinfla): - kerr 16:51:03 09/28/09 (0)
    I guess while they're accusing audiophiles of being biased by faceplates and brand names, they're being wowed by size and wattage. Better vs louder - hmmm....
- As you've always said... - kerr 13:24:33 09/27/09 (1)
  ...what's NOT easy to understand is why they waste so much time discussing that which has so little importance to them.
  - It is truly perplexing! - E-Stat 15:42:54 09/27/09 (0)
    as is the continuing adventures of that lovable inmate who always says "let me tell you what I don't think!" :)
    
    rw
Scavenging in the Toxic Waste Dump - Tony Lauck 08:04:17 09/26/09 (3)
"found under "Listening tests" on their web site (no link, since it doesn't seem to be appreciated by mods here)."

There were several power cord threads, so I went on a bit of a wild goose chase looking for the one in question. Before I ascertained which one, I came across an old thread on ABX testing. One post was quite interesting as it provided links to two articles about subliminal perception. Of course, if subliminal perception of audio is possible then the usual ABX tests can not be used to reach any conclusions about negative results.

Here are the links to the interesting articles:

http://www.apa.org/journals/features/xhp273600.pdf

http://watarts.uwaterloo.ca/~pmerikle/papers/Merikle.JConsStudies.1998.pdf

Enjoy!

Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
- RE: Scavenging in the Toxic Waste Dump - Pat D 10:21:28 09/26/09 (2)
  "if subliminal perception of audio is possible then the usual ABX tests can not be used to reach any conclusions about negative results."
  
  jj has said blind tests may show positive results even though the participants think they detect no differences. What are the "usual ABX tests"? Your conclusion doesn't seem to follow.
  
  "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
  - RE: Scavenging in the Toxic Waste Dump - Tony Lauck 11:03:12 09/26/09 (1)
    "jj has said blind tests may show positive results even though the participants think they detect no differences."
    
    If you study the Merikle paper that I linked, you will see this effect is discussed. A subject is not aware of perceiving anything, but he does bias his choices away from 50%. If this is happening, the effect will lack statistical significance unless a very large number of trials are used.
    
    Properly conducted psycho-acoustic tests, such as those jj does professionally, take these factors into account. The typical tests that we debate in Prophead have not done this. It is possible to pick up very subtle biases if the sample size is huge. This was done, for example, in the PEAR studies at Princeton in regard to PK, where the best subjects biased a random bit by a fraction of a percent, but the number of trials was so huge that the net result had statistical significance at very high confidence (equivalent to what is required in a proper Physics experiment). Needless to say, these experiments did not convince skeptics. It is always possible to dismiss statistical evidence if one starts with strongly held beliefs, and doing so can be rational in some cases.
    
    Tony Lauck
    
    "Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
    - http://watarts.uwaterloo.ca/~pmerikle/papers/Merikle.JConsSt (Open in New Window)
    - RE: Scavenging in the Toxic Waste Dump - geoffkait 09:42:23 09/27/09 (0)
      Ah, PEAR. Can Sheldrake and action at a distance be far behind?
      
      :-)
And your evaluation of his blind test is? - Pat D 14:30:08 09/25/09 (8)
But then perhaps you have nothing substantive to say about it.

"Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
- Considering your supposed mighty struggle comprehending English, I'm not sure you could... - carcass93 14:46:39 09/25/09 (7)
  ... appreciate anything substantive I'd have to say about it.
  
  So let's just mention the fact that besides insufficient # of attempts (10), nobody of "howling wolf pack" (in words of one apparently "moderate" participant there) could point to anything that was wrong with the test. That is, of course, if you discount ridiculous outbursts of some very obviously sick individuals.
  - Apparently you didn't read the thread very well . . . - Pat D 15:24:18 09/25/09 (6)
    Actually, they brought out some ambiguities. For example:
    
    Was the order of the trials random? Was the order set by the wife influenced by the husband's answers?
    
    Was one of the cables broken?
    
    Was there a hum issue?
    
    10/10 is pretty suggestive something happened, but the question is what?
    
    "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
    - You could easily answer all these questions yourself. - carcass93 08:56:52 09/28/09 (0)
      In fantasy world they (and apparently you) live:
      
      - of course wife was influenced by all things imaginable, and in turn influenced the husband (although tester said she was instructed not to manifest herself, and there's nothing mentioned to the contrary);
      
      - of course power cords were broken (most likely both), which manifested itself in one of them influencing sound more to the tester's liking;
      
      - there was such a terrible hum issue, that instead of obscuring fine details, it apparently managed to highlight differences between the cords.
      
      How about we get back to facts, for a change?
    - RE: Apparently you didn't read the thread very well . . . - Analog Scott 20:12:05 09/25/09 (4)
      Of course no such questioning ever takes place when the locals like the results. Just another classic case of cult members picking and choosing their evidence to suit their prejudices while pretending to be scientific. A creationist by any other name is still a creationist
      - Well, if you want to talk personalities . . . - Pat D 08:42:54 09/26/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Apparently you didn't read the thread very well . . . posted by Analog Scott on September 25, 2009 at 20:12:05
        
        Do you have one?
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
        
        Spreading your wings Pat? - bjh 10:25:18 09/26/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Well, if you want to talk personalities . . . posted by Pat D on September 26, 2009 at 08:42:54
        
        ... nice to see I suppose yet if that was any indication it appears your aptitude for wit is about on par with that for logic.
        
        In other words... don't quit your day job!
        
        Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
        
        I guess I struck a nerve - Analog Scott 08:55:25 09/26/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Well, if you want to talk personalities . . . posted by Pat D on September 26, 2009 at 08:42:54
        
        why else would you just come up with such an arbitrary lame insult? Nice discussion about audio Pat. :::snicker:::
        
        Well, that answers my question. (nt) - Pat D 16:38:26 10/03/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I guess I struck a nerve posted by Analog Scott on September 26, 2009 at 08:55:25
        
        .
        
        "Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
RE: Blind listening test of power cords - and reactions to it. - kerr 10:16:33 09/25/09 (13)
They demand tests.

When they get them and the results don't jibe with their beliefs, the test is flawed.

What's the point of discussing DBT? Or participating in them? If I make a claim of audible differences during sighted listening, would the H/A crowd believe me? No. Would they believe me if I tested blind? No. That is one of many things that makes them laughable and what makes the whole DBT argument absurd.

But you're right - it also makes lurking at H/A a side-splitting experience. :)
- Hydrogen Audio Is The Training Manuel For The LFOs On PHP - thetubeguy1954 13:45:50 09/26/09 (7)
  Hello Kerr!
  
  One cannot argue with dishonest people who are willing to falsely profess to honestly embrace the unbiased, objective, truth-seeking methods of scientific research in order to determine what the facts are in different areas of audio. Yet in reality they're seen to practice biased, unobjective, non-truth-seeking pseudoscientific in an effort to dishonestly "prove" their biased audio beliefs are correct! True scientific research doesn't cherry-pick which parts of science or tests they'll accept and which ones they won't, but that's exactly what most objectivists do!
  
  Either you embrace the unbiased, objective, truth-seeking methods of scientific research or you don't. This thread isn't directed at any one specific person, instead I'll reveal some of the things many "supposed" objectivists choose to ignore, even though they're based apon the same scientific methods they so dearly claim to embrace.
  
  For Example:
  
  1) They often ignore the fact that "expectation bias" works negatively too. What this means is "if" someone honestly believes that a person is only hearing a difference because they expect to hear a difference, then the science this person embraces also states they must also believe with equal conviction that the only reason an person isn't hearing a difference is because they just don't expect to!
  
  2) They often ignore the fact that the "placebo effect" ( Placebo = Latin for "I shall please") works negatively too. When the "placebo effect" is working negatively it is called the "nocebo effect" (Nocebo = Latin for "I shall harm). This works very similair to "expecation bias" above and essentially boils down to what to what you believe will happen is what will usually happen, either postively/placebo or negatively/nocebo. Whether your consciously aware of your beliefs or not, like a self-fulfilling prophecy. A good example of a placebo would be when a person is given a sugar pill and reports feeling better, because they believe they took medicine. A good example of a nocebo is when a person dies after being bitten by a non-venomous snake, because they believed the snake was venomous.
  
  3) They ignore that there are vast differences in how a medical DBT and a home audio DBT is carried out. Yet they want others to accept the usage of DBT's in medicine as being all the proof required that a DBT's usage in home audio has been proven as being scientifically valid. However the reality is that medical and audio DBTs differ in many ways.
  
  Thetubeguy1954
  
  ~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
  - RE: Hydrogen Audio Is The Training Manuel For The LFOs On PHP - Todd Krieger 19:28:05 09/28/09 (0)
    "One cannot argue with dishonest people who are willing to falsely profess to honestly embrace the unbiased, objective, truth-seeking methods of scientific research in order to determine what the facts are in different areas of audio."
    
    I wouldn't necessarily call them "dishonest", per se, but I would call them insecure. I find the "professing" in itself a sign of the need to sell one's abilities, because he thinks those abilities are not otherwise obvious. (Most competent designers don't really take a putdown of abilities or product personally in the first place. They only take it as constructive criticism to adjust his practice.)
    
    "Yet in reality they're seen to practice biased, unobjective, non-truth-seeking pseudoscientific in an effort to dishonestly 'prove' their biased audio beliefs are correct!"
    
    They don't think it's "dishonest"...... And I'm not totally sure myself........ But I think the problem is they think their beliefs are true and hence should be able to be proven. The problem is, as you mention later, this leads to "cherry picking".......
    
    "True scientific research doesn't cherry-pick which parts of science or tests they'll accept and which ones they won't, but that's exactly what most objectivists do!"
    
    They're "objectivists" in name only. I personally consider myself an "objectivist"...... (But that's a personal opinion.) What gets me personally is that most audiophiles don't really have a fanatical belief system, driven from an inferiority complex that fuels a seeming need to be confrontational. Whatever beliefs audiophiles have is based on what they think they hear, and they're simply seeking ideas to improve their audio experience. This is why the "need for proof" seems like a foreign language to them. It's totally irrelevant to their objective. The bottom line is they're either happy or unhappy with what they're listening to.
    
    A good designer uses end user opinion as constructive feedback to help improve the design..... A bad designer uses end user feedback to judge the end user's worthiness as a listener, using his own belief system as a litmus test.
  - I hope you have that backwards - kerr 15:11:31 09/26/09 (5)
    I hope they train here and go there - and stay there! :)
    
    The various arguments have been raging for decades and I'd wager that less than 2% of those on either side have switched - and 100% of that 2% probably did so on their own and not because of any audio site posts (admitted speculation).
    
    I'm constantly reminded here at PHP of E-Stat's comment regarding how and why it is that one side spends so much time arguing about that which they believe does not exist (sonic differences in components). Personally, I only have enough spare time to discuss things that DO matter.
    - Sadly I Don't Believe I Do... - thetubeguy1954 07:07:06 09/28/09 (4)
      Hello Kerr!
      
      I believe the LFOs train on Hydrogen Audio because over there they have the support of the moderators. Fact is the usuage of the word moderator on Hydrogen Audio is a joke in itself. A moderator is supposed to be an impartial person who arbitrates or mediates i.e., one that mediates between parties ( objectivists vs subjectivists ) at variance.
      
      However at Hydrogen Audio the "moderators" are LFOs themselves! They attack, ridicule, berate and disparage subjectivists as much and perhaps with even more vigor than their LFO members do! It's impossible to win a discussion, debate or arguement with a dishonest person who will either outright delete the opposing POV's posts or edit them, in an effort to make that POV appear incorrect or the person supporting it appear inept or incompetent. Yet that's precisely what "moderators" at Hydrogen Audio do!
      
      Over at at Hydrogen Audio LFOs learn to attack subjectivist views together like a wolf pack. They learn to praise each others actions and pat each other on the back for the united support they provide as they continue to attack, ridicule, berate and disparage subjectivist POVs instead of ever holding an intelligent discussion or simply answering the questions asked of them!
      
      Thetubeguy1954
      
      ~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
      - Their forum, their rules - kerr 06:10:11 09/29/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Sadly I Don't Believe I Do... posted by thetubeguy1954 on September 28, 2009 at 07:07:06
        
        I think H/A is a great forum where all the non-experiential theorists can get together and bond. I think their rules are fine as well - no arguments and no progression. Of course, if they come here, their beliefs will be challenged, so I'm not sure why they'd want to leave their safe haven. "Good enough" doesn't work here; and "the music is incidental" is about as foreign to this group as it gets. Those folks should stay where they are safe from reality.
        
        "Their forum, their rules" ah that depends on who you are - Analog Scott 12:28:16 09/30/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Their forum, their rules posted by kerr on September 29, 2009 at 06:10:11
        
        If you are one of the lunitic fringe you can say any sort of nasty thing about any subjectivist and that is cool. If you are not one of them you can actually get banned for pointing out the conflicts between their beliefs and actual science. Kind of odd for an alleged science based forum no?
        
        RE: "Their forum, their rules" ah that depends on who you are - kerr 16:55:14 09/30/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Their forum, their rules" ah that depends on who you are posted by Analog Scott on September 30, 2009 at 12:28:16
        
        > If you are one of the lunitic fringe you can say any sort of nasty thing about any subjectivist and that is cool. If you are not one of them you can actually get banned for pointing out the conflicts between their beliefs and actual science <
        
        And that's one of their rules! :)
        
        > Kind of odd for an alleged science based forum no? <
        
        Yep! But it's their cocoon and we can't fault them for wanting to wrap themselves up in it, now can we?
        
        yeah I didn't know about the unwritten rules - Analog Scott 22:24:31 09/30/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "Their forum, their rules" ah that depends on who you are posted by kerr on September 30, 2009 at 16:55:14
        
        I foolishly went by the rules they posted. So I figure tomorrow night will be a good night to get banned again. I'll follow the written rules and get tossed for calling them on their own B.S. I figure i should strike late at night so I can copy my own posts before they get taken down. Should make for some good laughs
- I've had some real fun with them lately - Analog Scott 20:07:58 09/25/09 (1)
  Even got the moderator to admit he thinks he is imune to bias effects. Funny stuff. The level of venom there is hysterical. Just another cult that believes they have a monopoly on the truth. To bad they give real science such a bad name.
  - I've seen your posts there - kerr 06:09:17 09/26/09 (0)
    > Even got the moderator to admit he thinks he is imune to bias effects <
    
    Is he also immune to splattering after falling off a 20 story building? Talk about extraordinary claims! LMAO!
- BTW, one old friend popped up there, too. - carcass93 10:54:35 09/25/09 (1)
  Now, I'll leave it up to you to guess who that was, and what was the nature of his post.
  
  Hint: "human males boasting..."
  - I saw his post - kerr 12:10:33 09/25/09 (0)
    Hope he's happy.
    
    I find H/A to be loaded with reality-challenged individuals and I'm glad they have a nice cave to gather in. I used to think that dissenting opinions allowed more knowledge and intelligence to be disseminated. After a few years here on PropHead, I think the best course is to keep like-minded folks within their own comfort zones. Occasionally there are some threads here that have some possibilites but then the tired and true dogmatic beliefs rear their heads and the thread fizzles.
- The Knights who say Ni. (nt) - Al Sekela 10:49:30 09/25/09 (0)
  :)

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.