In Reply to: Thanks, posted by bjh on February 1, 2007 at 09:47:25:
Bjh,First I really appreciate your giving me the benefit of the doubt on this issue. I have a love/hate relationship with internet forums. I usually believe I'm making my posts crystal clear as to what & why I'm posting on that topic ONLY to find out to others it wasn't clear and appeared as if I was implying something differently. The motivation for my post was simply this. To afford anyone near the Orlando, FL area an opportunity to listen to the Acoustic System resonator product for themselves and draw their own conclusions based on that experience.
It wasn't intended as an understated jab at the Space Coast Audio Society (SCAS). From what I've heard about the members of SCAS from members of CFAS they're a good group of guys, besides I really like Chris (the only member I really know) so I wouldn't do anything to intentionally hurt him or them. Nor was it posted to give the typically crude "objectivist" crowd an opportunity to heap scorn SCAS. Hell those in the objectivist crowd that are typically crude don't need any help from me to be that way, do they? I figured it could give someone from either group a chance to meet with some other music lovers and listen for themselves and then as the Oracle told Neo "Make up your own damn mind!" I go to CFAS meetings and don't always agree a tweak or component is an improvement. So hearing or not hearing an improvement isn't going to be an issue.
I forgive you for fearing such nefarious intent on my behalf. I can see how someone of lesser character, after naming the Acoustic System resonator product as being one of the types of products they believe leads to: Objectivists from ever taking Subjectivists seriously, could have had a devious motive for making this post. I'll also readily admit I said: Are we revisting the Tice Clock all over again? But you're forgetting I qualified that remark with: OMG! It's the blind acceptance of 'audio' devices like this... Anyone who listens for themself and makes a decision based on that listening is no longer guilty of blind acceptance of an audio device. Their opinion is now based on experience, no matter what others think of that experience, it's NOT blind acceptance.
Since making my original post I've read morricabs explinantion of the Acoustic Resonators work. I've also read the link you provided as well. I now see these devices in a different light. I'm still skeptical, but believe it's possible they do as the manufacturer says they do. I'd just need to hear this "improvement" for myself before investing any of my money buying them.
Hopefully I've now commented sufficiently on the purpose and the intent of my post. It was simply to give anyone who lives close enough a chance to hear for themselves what these devices are capable of. Perhaps they'd be like the VPI "Magic Brick" ---it amazed me after I heard what it did, even though my intial impressions apon seeing it was ONLY a fool would buy one of these!
Thetubeguy1954
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Thanks, - thetubeguy1954 13:04:49 02/01/07 (24)
- Your point taken. - cheap-Jack 08:04:58 02/02/07 (0)
- Very well, only allow me to point out - bjh 14:40:05 02/01/07 (22)
- Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 12:17:48 02/02/07 (20)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - AJinFLA 18:21:47 02/05/07 (8)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 06:16:24 02/06/07 (4)
- It is not me you must convince, it is you. - AJinFLA 16:45:55 02/06/07 (1)
- Another Moronic Reply From That Bird-Brain POLLYinFLA - thetubeguy1954 11:09:05 02/08/07 (0)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - theaudiohobby 08:05:32 02/06/07 (1)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 10:36:43 02/06/07 (0)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - andy19191 05:07:00 02/06/07 (2)
- Do you consider yourself to be an "objective audiophile" or a "non-audiophile"? - AJinFLA 16:54:06 02/06/07 (1)
- Re: Do you consider yourself to be an "objective audiophile" or a "non-audiophile"? - andy19191 01:32:12 02/07/07 (0)
- You're rare but not alone - kerr 13:35:21 02/03/07 (10)
- Re: You're alone but not rare - AJinFLA 18:31:56 02/05/07 (1)
- Wow! You made sense! - kerr 07:34:42 02/06/07 (0)
- You guys will do just about anything to avoid actually proving you can detect what you say you can. - Pat D 18:01:02 02/05/07 (7)
- I've already proven it! - kerr 07:29:03 02/06/07 (6)
- Hardly. The burden of proof is on those who make the claim. We point out they haven't met it. (nt) - Pat D 07:53:24 02/06/07 (5)
- No One Is Under ANY Burden To Provide Proof To Others! - thetubeguy1954 06:25:47 02/07/07 (3)
- You don't understand burden of proof. - Pat D 12:02:04 02/08/07 (1)
- Pat D YOU Don't Understand That No One Is Under Any Burden To Provide You With Proof. - thetubeguy1954 11:53:50 02/09/07 (0)
- Exactly - kerr 07:51:05 02/07/07 (0)
- But we HAVE met the burden of proof. The only disagreement is to whom we carry that burden (nt) - kerr 08:32:05 02/06/07 (0)
- Umm... - kerr 11:49:09 02/02/07 (0)