In Reply to: The examples you offer are geared towards a Beltist explanation. And... posted by clarkjohnsen on July 25, 2007 at 09:06:10:
>>...other explanations look very weak indeed. But if I may say, that's rather unfair!
Counterexample: If one aligns a cartridge more accurately to the groove and hears increased spatiality and less distortion, would *that* be a Beltist effect? Or if one replaces well-used tubes with new ones, would that?<<
Speaking of unfair explanations! There are well known causes for sound improvement for changing audio cartridges and tubes. What is the well known cause for improving sound by tying a reef knot in a passive cable?
>>See, we can both come up with examples galore. It just happens that CD treatments fall somewhere in the middle, which is what makes them so interesting. I simply am saying that you can not adduce Beltism as the exclusive or even primary cause of the audible effects here -- anyway not until more, much more is known about how the damn things (CDs) work.<<
You don't need to know how CD's work or even what a CD is, to determine the cause of the effects of hand lotion on CD's. All you need are 3 things: 1) Working pair of ears. 2) Listening threshold high enough to hear the effects of the hand lotion 3) My post in the hand cream and cd's thread, which I wrote days ago, that explains how to test if its a Beltist effect.
If you can hear the effects on a passive CD, it eliminates all other theories posited on this phenomenon. For, as I already claimed, **it has nothing to do with CDs**. The hand lotion tweak will probably work just as well on the battery in your remote.
>>PS I have seen on the market CDs that claim to have actual "healing" sounds or music (more likely, "music") on them. Maybe they've been treated?<<
Not with Beltist product IMO, as I don't see Beltism as "healing" anything, or purporting to do so."silence tells me secretly, everything..."
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: The examples you offer are geared towards a Beltist explanation. And... - Posy Rorer 14:46:58 07/25/07 (15)
- You write as though I'm denying the Beltist phenomena; I am not. I'm just trying to... - clarkjohnsen 08:28:45 07/26/07 (14)
- My argument is the lotion tweak is a Beltist tweak. And nothing else. - Posy Rorer 11:22:30 07/26/07 (13)
- How we gonna separate the variables? nt - clarkjohnsen 07:53:28 07/30/07 (6)
- Easy. Test passive devices in another room. nt - Posy Rorer 22:04:53 07/30/07 (5)
- Do we know that such a move obliterates the effect? Maybe go next door? nt - clarkjohnsen 08:41:19 07/31/07 (4)
- Yes, well going or placing the DUT next door will obliterate both conventional and Beltist effects. -nt - Posy Rorer 12:55:47 07/31/07 (3)
- What if "next door" is an apartment and thier rooms are contiguous with yours? (Just askin'...) - clarkjohnsen 09:40:29 08/01/07 (2)
- RE: What if "next door" is an apartment and thier rooms are contiguous with yours? (Just askin'...) - May Belt 12:37:29 08/01/07 (1)
- "Science does not begin to touch a fraction of how and why things work." No argument here! And... - clarkjohnsen 12:44:37 08/01/07 (0)
- Wow. That was quite a string of insults! A+ for effort! - Enophile 14:53:34 07/26/07 (5)
- Awww shucks, tweren't nuthin'.... No, really. - Posy Rorer 21:40:45 07/26/07 (4)
- Poser, showing his reflective, thoughtful side.... - rlw 07:43:21 07/30/07 (2)
- RLW's reflective side: "Make the giant, manly leap and show up on my doorstep while runnin' yer big mouth." - Posy Rorer 15:35:39 07/31/07 (0)
- SF Tech troll, have you met the Richard L. Wainwright troll? - Posy Rorer 22:00:58 07/30/07 (0)
- Posy, that is quite a manifesto you have there... - SF tech 23:32:47 07/26/07 (0)