|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.129.176.228
Anonymous Customer Comments on Machina Dynamica Teleportation Tweak
"I turned my system on early this morning, so it had 6 hours to warm up before the Teleportation Tweak. Now, just after the tweak, I'm playing some things I'm intimately familiar with, and everything is much better! Voices are clearer, especially in the lower midrange, and more realistic sounding. The bass is better as well as the treble; cymbol strikes are cleaner and smoother with more information, and ambient information in the recordings has appeared out of nowhere. All these improvements are not at all reminiscent of cables changes, for example, where the improvements can often be frequency dependent. These improvements with the Teleportation Tweak are across the board! My wife heard them too." - Arizona, June 2007
*********************
"Hallo Geoff Kait, this tweak is really amazing! I have no idea how it works, but it works! My high resolution equipment, which is highly tuned and working fantastically, broke new ground. My Kharma loudspeakers are singing like never before. Everything is faster, with more open stage, more music, less analytical. This tweak is even stronger than the two "Clever Little Clocks" I own! Please tell me: How does it work? What is happening in my house?!!" - Germany, June 2007
*********************
"My first reaction is that the soundstage is a lot more "integrated" and "present" and the upper frequencies are considerably sweeter. Addendum: What I get with both phones treated is great immediacy to the soundstage, a cleaner top end, and a great bass. The strength of my system has always been a very realistic soundstage. This Teleportation Tweak has taken me further in this direction. I've listened to many of my CDs and records in the last few days and find them quite different from how they used to sound. I am beginning to think I understated the benefits of this tweak initially." - Texas, June 2007
*********************
"Dynamics and microdynamics were more pronounced...notes from a piano were less congested and I could hear the details of the mechanical striking of the keys. The stage was deeper and wider with less noise and distortion. The sound reminded me a lot of when I auditioned the Memory Player here recently. I also was very impressed with the improvement to my HDTV video picture, much better color, contrast and resolution; I can clearly see the threads in the Navy blue suit worn by Jon Stewart's guest and the transparency and depth of the acrylic guest desk on the Daily Show." - Florida, June 2007
*********************
Follow Ups:
I just had my system phone tweaked by Geoff. My system has been teleported to a higher state of musicality.How is this even possable.I happen to be a fan machenica dynamica's product's, but this is beyond stange.After my teleportation I am hearing more of everything good , with a musical~rightness to piano that was not present prior to teleportation.I loved this tweak very much.I also love the word teleportation.Very cool,a home run. Brian
The board just gets all messy-like.
__________________
;-)
You show up with the video camera, yell "Bears gone wild!", and those so inclined provide the ensuing chaos.
But I find it disturbing that:
A) You knew this picture existed
B) You knew where to go find it
C) You stored it in your account
I mean, really, who does that?
:P
__________________
"A) You knew this picture existed" - Google search
"B) You knew where to go find it" - Google search
"C) You stored it in your account" - temporarily stored on desktop, one could just provide a link to the url if they so desired. AA made it easier than ever to include all types of images a few weeks back
"I mean, really, who does that?" Someone who cares deeply enough to give that little extra effort, someone like me.
My grandmother was right; I do have a heart of gold. ;-)
Even when you start threads that are unbearable.
:D
__________________
The human understanding is no dry light, but receives input from the will and affections; whence proceed sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather believe were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless in short are the ways, and sometimes imperceptable, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.
Francis Bacon,
Novum Organon
(1620)
Think about it...
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
'imperceptible' - I have to learn to proofread!
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
The following exchange is complete and sequential. E-mails and names have been edited for privacy. There was no phone conversation during this time. The first e-mail in this sequence was our first exchange in two months.
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: (Rupertdacat)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:16 PM
To: (Wellfed)
Subject: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Hi (Wellfed),
Time flies...
What are your current thoughts on the little experiment we discussed a couple of months ago?
Hope all is well,
(Rupe)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: (Wellfed)
To: (Rupertdacat)
Subject: RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:56:39 -0500
Things are well. I was just thinking of you earlier today. My monthly trips to the Twin Cities haven’t produced any left over time so far. Looks like we should be thinking late June or July. I should be down there for extended periods at that time after my granddaughter’s birth. I’m a little concerned about the prejudice you voiced after we last talked. I still would like to hook up with you, but I hope we can get back to that “let’s just have a little fun with all this” mode. This was the assumption I was operating from. I certainly understand, and don’t begrudge, scepticism regarding P.W.B. based stuff. It just seems that you have something personal against Geoff Kait and I am uneasy about the fairness of your mindset in evaluating one of his products. Perhaps we should agree to publish only (name deleted) impressions, or those of his family if they end up getting involved.
(Wellfed)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: (Rupertdacat)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 6:23 PM
To: (Wellfed)
Subject: RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Hi (wellfed),
Glad to here all is O.K.
You wrote, "It just seems that you have something personal against Geoff Kait and I am uneasy about the fairness of your mindset in evaluating one of his products."
I do not know Geoff Kait, have never had any interaction with him, have not looked at his website, and have not laid hands or eyes on any of his products. I am, indeed, skeptical about the claims for the Clever Little Clock. We all have prejudices. You, for example, are clearly prejudiced to believe that it does work. After all, you as much as told me in our phone conversation of 2/6 that you had not actually carefully evaluated whether it works in your system or not.
When I first started putting my system together, I was very prejudiced against the notion that interconnects and/or power cords could have much (if any) impact on the performance of a system. It took me all of two minutes (once I actually got around to trying it out for myself) to realize I was wrong. It took much longer than that to get some inkling as to why I might have been so wrong.
So... as I say- we are all prejudiced. The sin is unwillingness to test one's beliefs for underlying prejudice. I am willing, in fact eager, to do so.
With best wishes,
(Rupe)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: (Wellfed)
To: (Rupertdacat)
Subject: RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 21:45:00 -0500
Regarding the Clever Little Clock you had this to say on 2/17/07
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/505.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: (Rupertdacat)
To: (Wellfed)
Subject: RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 23:01:00 -0500
Hi (Wellfed).
Yes- those are my prejudices. I am fairly certain that I am right (like anybody else, I am always fairly certain that I am right when I feel strongly about something).
I never did, until just now, see your response to my post: "How do you suggest we get around the extreme prejudice evident in this posting of yours Rupe?"
Here's how:
- I was hoping to have a listen for myself. You indicated that you would make a CLC available to me. I was disappointed that you did not follow through on this in the timeframe you had indicated ("a couple of weeks").
- I was hoping to get more data when I suggested to you that you remove the CLC from your system to see if that made a notable change. I was willing to give your observations serious consideration.
- I conceived of a good and fair test for the CLC. A test that would convince me, even if I could not discern an effect of a CLC, that someone else could.
That is my concrete, no nonsense, answer to your fair question.
I have made a strong statement about the efficacy of the CLC (based on my understanding of how the world works) without any proper personal evaluation. Likewise, you have made SEVERAL strong statements about CLC's efficacy without, as best as I can tell, proper personal evaluation. Please recall that you admitted to me that your first CLC arrived, uncannily, at the EXACT moment you had made an important change to your system (turning off the video circuitry of your main source). It seemed to me that at the moment you told me that, you realized you had not adequately evaluated the CLC.
(Wellfed), I believe that in you heart of hearts you don't really know if you believe in the CLC. It would require a bit of courage, for both you and I, to put the CLC to a fair test. After all, we would both be taking the risk that we would be proven incorrect. So... big deal!
With best wishes,
(Rupe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FW: Clever Little Clock evaluation
From: (Rupertdacat)
Sent:Thu 4/19/07 11:56 PM
To: (Wellfed)
P.S.
I wish I hadn't written "So... big deal". I know that this is very important to you. That's why I don't think you will take the risk of going forward with the challenge I posed you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: (Wellfed)
To: (Rupertdacat)
Subject: RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:31:00 -0500
The reason I MAY choose not to go forward with the challenge is I’m getting this JREF vibe from you. If you are interested in hearing a Clever Little Clock, in a timeframe other than what we’ve discussed, you could do so like anybody else, i.e., purchase one with a money-back guarantee and, at most, risk shipping costs.
In case you missed it, I have been saying from the start of our conversation that any time other than late June, early July, may be problematic, and that I’d have to play it by ear. My monthly trips to the Twin Cities have, so far, net me about three hours of free time on Sunday mornings before meeting up with my traveling companion and heading back to Fargo/Moorhead.
In case you’re wondering what the JREF vibe is, it’s this ‘I know you better than you know yourself’, “I was disappointed that you did not follow through on this in the timeframe you had indicated ("a couple of weeks").", "Michael, I believe that in you heart of hearts you don't really know if you believe in the CLC." sort of attitude.
I would greatly enjoy meeting up with a fellow Atma-Sphere enthusiast, one who is well acquainted with (name deleted), whom I admire greatly, and simply enjoy the fellowship of a fellow audio enthusiast and look at a product that we both find to be of mutual interest, and 'just have some fun'. Somehow we’ve managed to step outside of this ideal. If we can get back to that level, I’d love to meet up with you and Paul as originally discussed.
(Wellfed)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Clever Little Clock evaluation
From: (Rupertdacat)
Sent:Fri 4/20/07 3:16 PM
To: (Wellfed)
Hi (Wellfed),
Its simple:
If you were "blinded" and were to listen to repeated tunes of your choice, would you be able to tell just by listening when the CLC was actually on (i.e. powered up) or off (powered off)? You only need one other person to run this test. You could do it at home on your system.
- Before each listen have an assistant in another room (well out of your sight and hearing) with the CLC. They would flip a coin to determine whether the battery should be in or out of the CLC (e.g. Heads- battery in, Tails- battery out).
- Your assistant, after placing or removing the battery as indicated by the coin flip, would record this info, put the CLC in a opaque shopping bag, and place the shopping bag in your listening area.
- You would then listen to a tune, for as long as you wished or as many times as you wished, and then: write down on a piece of paper whether you thought the CLC was on or off, fold the paper, call your assistant, and hand them the folded paper.
- Your assistant would then take the shopping bag/CLC back to the other room, read and record your answer.
- The process could then be repeated.
You should decide ahead of time how many times to go through the above process. Ten would probably be reasonable. It is important that while you listen, your assistant not be in the listening area so as to not be able to transmit subconcious cues to you. Of course, for this test to work, it must be impossible to tell through the shopping bag whether the CLC is on or off. For example, if it makes a ticking sound, that would not work.
As (perhaps) the most vocal supporter of the CLC (and other equally unlikely products), you owe it to yourself and others to convince yourself as to whether you have been correct or if you have gone out on a limb, and misled other people, for who knows what reason.
Anyway... as I said, you don't need me to do this. You can decide for yourself.
Have fun,
(Rupe)
nt
do you think Kait will be adding the report just turned in by rlw?
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
nt
Okay, 'no' to the first or second question (or both)?
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
nt
So, how long have you 'worked' in Congress?
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
nt
... Since we're all effectively helping to hype a bogus tweak anyway... heres an idea for you...
Take your Teleportation tweak, incorporate as a Mobile Ring Tone... sell it to Millions!! Declare it as a cummulative tweak... more calls, more effective! And laugh all the way to the bank!!
With all the iPhone hype going on, you're bound to get half a gazillion bozos who just might spend on it. There you go!
(Just send me a 1% cheque when you've hit your 1st million :)
[-;
I thought this was a joke. I checked it out and it appears to be serious.
The scary thing is that there are apparently people willing to fork over $60 for such a 'product'. What exactly *is* the product here? Signals sent to the customer via telephone are going to make his audio system sound better - amazing.
PT Barnum was right!
Someone call Michael Shermer; he'll *love* this!!!
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
Wellfed,
I don't have detailed knowledge of the way the Telepotato works- only the description in the Audiogoon listing, but it seems to me that it involves a person phoning a number and then hearing some kind of signals. The user is invited to have their system warmed up, and this instruction to me seems to be key to a possible way this works.
If this is the case, it seems possible that the user is being conditioned by the telephones sounds. It would be easy to produce sounds that include certain distortions, reversed polarity to please Clark, and harshness such that when quickly (remember the system is supposed to be ready to hear) jumping back to even a modest audio system will, by contrast, make anything sound better.
Clever idea- which I can imagine has a real effect. If I listened to FM over the phone with it's distortion, high noise level, and limited frequencies, anything heard next will seem an astoundingly improved.
I'd be interested to set up an experiment: someone would ring up another, play FM from a clock radio over the phone and then have the person rush over and listen to the same broadcast out of their $30,000 system. I'll wager the system amy well acquire newfound qualities. And, I imagine the person will find they need a "recharge" to hear the same qualities again, and then it will "wear off". If this worked, this would tend to confirm my notion of using the contrasts to create the impression of improvement. - I really can't conceive of any other possibility of the way this works!
Aural memory is quirky and some people probably can't maintain very clear sense memories even of their own system as the source material can vary so widely. Plus, we tend to fuss over the hardware and keep making subtle changes. I changed the 12AT7 in a McIntosh MR67 early in the week and the sound is amazingly altered.
I developed- or tried to develop- aural memory through 35 years of study of early keyboard instruments- for example, I remember the particular sound of the 1769 Taskin at Yale, though it was 1976 I played it. It would be interesting to have some poeple with very good aural memories to try the Telepotato system.
Just a thought- it may be magic !
Cheers,
Bambi B
I think you're brilliant!
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
Just let me know how I can assist.
Wellfed,
My thought is to have a person and a friend both tune to the same FM station, one on his main Spifforamic XL system and the friend on a slightly detuned clock radio. The person has the Spifforamic warmed up, but then only listens for a few minutes to have reference. Then, the person listens while the friend plays the clock radio over the phone. The person stands near the Spifforamic, so as soon as the phone is put down, the same FM broadcast is switched on.
-Will the person then hear an instant "improvement' in the main system?
It would be essential for the person doing the experiment to have experienced the actual Telepotato effect, so as to be able to compare. I have no idea what the signals coming over the phone are like- they may hahve specical formulations- like reverse polarity, phase shift, strong odd order harmonics distortion, background noise, etc., to intensify the contrast with the person's system.
As the quoted testimonials are so enthusiastic, there must be something happening, and I can only think it's something along these lines of preconditioning the user into a temporary state of displeasure with a sound then the return to their carefully refined gear is a corresponding aural 'relief' and it seems epseically enhanced sound by the contrast. If this is the way it works, I would then predict the effect wears off , but can be renewed by another dose of contrast,..
I would be interested if you or anyone else here tries this. I have a friend -another Audio Research SP10 owner, and I may ask him to try this, but without experience with the actual Telepotato it would not be a dependable test of the idea.
If you can't find someone to do this, I'd be glad to try it, but I'm in Los Angeles and I think it would be best to have the same FM signal on both ends of the experiment.
Cheers,
Bambi B
TomLarson,
And for 238 you're still a very lively writer of forum titles!
Yes, as you so subtely yet forcefully imply, great French harpsichords are as variable as the snowflake but as numerous as the Dodo- just a few stuffed ones in museums.
The late 18th C. French doubles are, as you very well know, lush and enveloping and sustaining, but I like the more articulate, crisper Flemish sound- you get stronger counterpoint. And when I'm particulary depressed-a clavichord with meantone temperament.
Still, I believe listening and trying to remember the particular charcteristics of instruments is as good training as I can imagine for listening to different preamplifiers,...
I send a 'Grand Ravelament' in your general direction!
Cheers,
Bambi B
I use my real name...it's the only one I can be sure of. Your knowledge of things keyboard far outstrips mine. To me, late 18th c. French doubles (two bottles of wine served with dinner in some of the cheaper restaurants of the time) MADE me lush, but were not, in and of themselves, lush...in my opinion. But late 18th c wasn't the best time for me. Cheers.
This is nothing but a blatant advert and shill for a product , an abuse of the forum.
Rodney Gold
Forum abuse? Public service? Would you like to see the pro segregated from the con?
I don't think Wellfed is a shill. He and Clark are just a little out there (and not just regarding MD products) :P
As he wrote to James Smith in 1822, " Man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind."
Good advice for any age.
.
Reason is considered boring, facts are very boring, entertainment is king. The internet is full of information, but little knowledge:-)
What we lack is a "reason" filter, just like we have spam filters.
r
If so, what effect did it have upon your system? Surely, Geoff would be thrilled to have your quote to include on his webpage.
If not, *why* are you defending it so vociferously?
What say you? And, please, not another one-liner, NT-type post. This is an important subject and deserves more than your typical "drive-by" posting antics.
-RW-
The shameful way most of the fellows here have behaved -- sneering, jeering, mocking -- merits little reply. One liners do the job efficiently.
"*Why* are you defending it so vociferously?" I'm not. Read again, this time with an eye perhaps directed to the hypocrisy of those who make demands -- unfunded demands, at that -- on others to provide whatever they fancy as "proof", yet stating that the product or service is "snake oil".
clark
Okay Clark, so your position is that the burden of proof does not lie with those making outrageous claims about ‘products’, but on those who doubt such claims. That is probably the most irrational statement I’ve ever read in my life.
Guess what? My wife bought some new coasters last month, and when I placed one on the table next to me, the most amazing thing happened. The picture on my TV suddenly became High Definition – I just couldn’t believe it, but when I put that damn thing outside, my TV looked like an ordinary NTSC set again. After setting it back on the table, I was looking at HDTV again – it’s really quite remarkable. But then I switched on my audio system and was completely blown away – I’ve never heard a stereo sound more real.
I am a chemist and I determined the composition of the coaster that made the remarkable improvements and have now developed a new and improved ceramic (not ordinary ceramic mind you) disk that when placed within three feet of anyone in the room, all of the aforementioned enhancements become instantly noticeable. The true magic is that as long as this disk is within three feet of anyone in the room, that person will be in the “sweet spot”. It even works for people in another room – perfect stereo imaging behind the speakers. You have to experience this to believe it! The upside is that this device never needs batteries. The downside is that it cannot be used as a coaster because once an object is placed on top of the disk, the magic disappears.
I’m selling them for a very reasonable price of $30 each. How many would like to order?
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
But that was already clear.
"Okay Clark, so your position is that the burden of proof does not lie with those making outrageous claims about ‘products’, but on those who doubt such claims." No. A total, gross and probably deliberate misreading -- by one who finds himself unable to deal with the reality of new discovery of a sort he wasn't taught in school. Here's a true statement of my position, which I've iterated over and over:
My position is that the burden of proof does not lie with those making outrageous claims about ‘products’, but on those who loudly demand such proof before they'll listen. Hey, I'd be happy to run any tests, if you provide the funding for the time you want me to spend -- and it will be a lot of time, to cover every possible procedural cubbyhole into which the critics will crawl if they don't like the results (which they never do).
As for your wife's new coasters, send me a couple on trial and I'll get back to you with my honest results. Or... don't you believe in that?
clark
Color me amazed.
(Had to get in my sneering, jeering, mocking comment. You understand.)
I'm steeling myself for the one-liner.
a
I refer you to your own words, just a few posts above.
a
I stand corrected. The rigor with which you routinely defend off-the-wall tweaks like this one led me to believe that you surely must have listened to them and found them worthwhile. Not the photo in the freezer either?
...the utter lack of rigor and the rancidity of their knee-jerk opponents' posts. The basic statement each one makes (along with the requisite sarcasm and contempt typical of the ignorant) is: That can't be!
It's not a sound position that they take.
clark
The knee jerks seem to be as evident in the pro (yours, Kait's and Wellfed's) ranks as in anyone else's.
Can't speak for rancidity.
d
... to find my mea culpa. Live and learn :-)
Hint: "I stand corrected."
r
from the elder statesman of the Maryland Audio Society for the Hearing Impaired. Your high frequency dropoff must be down to what, about 6 kHz?
GK
nt
Don't you wish sometimes you could be back at work with all those know-it-all whippersnappers? Not than anyone could know more than you.
And Clark's rejoinders aren't NEARLY as lame as that one. Cat got Clark's tongue?
nt
But you knew that. And all this is about Machina Dynamica anyway, so you know what you're doing. Any moderator in the vicinity who would like to put this whole thread out of its misery, feel free.
Anyone who suspects an 'extensively modified' travel alarm clock placed in one's home to improve an audio system (or TV) is snake oil seems to be employing good judgment in my view (ditto that for this teleportation nonsense). Anyone who believes that such a device actually works is certainly entitled to his viewpoint, but I think the operative word here is "believes". Placebo effect is a well documented phenomenon.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
...the placebo phenomenon works! Else it wouldn't be a concern, would it?
Could it be, that the only reason you dismiss this aspect so... dismissively, is that you're ashamed of not understanding it?
Also you use that word, "seems" -- got any scientific evidence to back that up?
clark
1) "...the placebo phenomenon works! Else it wouldn't be a concern, would it?" I fully understand the placebo effect. If you are implying that the teleportation tweak works by way of suggestion, then you are admitting that it is simply a sugar pill - a $60 sugar pill!
2) "Could it be, that the only reason you dismiss this aspect so... dismissively, is that you're ashamed of not understanding it?" There was *nothing* dismissive about my statement concerning placebo effect, and I cannot conceive how one could possibly infer from the aforementioned statement that I don't understand said phenomenon. I simply stated that the only means (in my view) by which the Clever Little Clock or the Teleportation Tweak might work is fideism.
3) "Also you use that word, "seems" -- got any scientific evidence to back that up?" I used the word 'seems' in the context of one's judiciousness - no scientific evidence is necessary. However, in this age of pseudoscience, prudence dictates that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinarily well-tested the evidence must be. The previous sentence applies to the two cited tweaks in spades – I cannot imagine more extraordinary claims. So, I hereby turn your request on you – got any scientific evidence to back these tweaks up? By the way, anecdotes do not a science make.
For a better understanding of my mode of thinking, I highly recommend Michael Shermer’s book “Why People Believe Weird Things” – I think there are some individuals here who would benefit from a little more skeptical thinking.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
1) "...the placebo phenomenon works! Else it wouldn't be a concern, would it?" I fully understand the placebo effect. If you are implying that the teleportation tweak works by way of suggestion, then you are admitting that it is simply a sugar pill - a $60 sugar pill!
Not even close. Look at the original statement: "Anyone who believes that such a device actually works is certainly entitled to his viewpoint, but I think the operative word here is 'believes'. Placebo effect is a well documented phenomenon." The words "believes" and "placebo" are used there, as per usual, pejoratively. It was to the banal rhetoric I was responding by suggesting that "placebos" have been proven sometimes *to really work*, and not just in the mind but in the body.
2) "Could it be, that the only reason you dismiss this aspect so... dismissively, is that you're ashamed of not understanding it?" There was *nothing* dismissive about my statement concerning placebo effect, and I cannot conceive how one could possibly infer from the aforementioned statement that I don't understand said phenomenon. I simply stated that the only means (in my view) by which the Clever Little Clock or the Teleportation Tweak might work is fideism.
And there you go again, consigning the effect to an "exclusive reliance in... faith, with consequent rejection of appeals to science or philosophy." (I quote the dictionary.) If that isn't dismissive, then what is?
3) "Also you use that word, "seems" -- got any scientific evidence to back that up?" I used the word 'seems' in the context of one's judiciousness - no scientific evidence is necessary.
Hmm... Not necessary for *you*, anyway! But how does that comport with your... oh never mind.
However, in this age of pseudoscience,
Huh! Aren't you aware of what people like yourself is previous ages said about X-rays, continental drift, germ theory etc. etc.? "Pseudoscience!" There's a long and undistinguished history there, of inability to tell the difference; whenever new ideas are offered, the entrenched establishment rises as one in their contemptuous cry.
prudence dictates that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinarily well-tested the evidence must be.
You read that somewhere, right? And you think it's true therefore, without proof.
The previous sentence applies to the two cited tweaks in spades – I cannot imagine more extraordinary claims.
You got quite a paucity of imagination there, fella. Maybe you've spent too much time on the computer...
So, I hereby turn your request on you – got any scientific evidence to back these tweaks up? By the way, anecdotes do not a science make.
Thanks, Teach, I'll keep your instruction in mind.
Meanwhile, your not availing yourself of hypothesis in audio shows a distinctly unexperimental bent; yours is more a couch-potato science: "Clark, peel me a grape, would you, my good man?"
For a better understanding of my mode of thinking, I highly recommend Michael Shermer’s book “Why People Believe Weird Things” – I think there are some individuals here who would benefit from a little more skeptical thinking.
Wink wink, nod nod, eh?
Have you ever noticed how a patronizing attitude effortlessy accompanies every pronunciamento of the Old Guard?
clark
The original statement was yours, not mine – mine was a reply to the original statement and I did not use the terms ‘believes’ and ‘placebo’ pejoratively or dismissively. Once again, I used those terms as the only possible explanation (in my view) for the efficacy of the two ‘tweaks’ I cited. Your reiteration of the power of placebo to “really work” would seem to make my point – you are, in fact, implying that placebo is the mode of operation, just as I suspected.
For crying out loud, I stated that I wasn’t being dismissive about placebo effect. I NEVER claimed that I wasn’t dismissive about these so-called tweaks. Give me ONE good reason why I should NOT be. Stop distorting my statements – I’m being clear and direct. Calling me dismissive does not speak in support of your position.
I could teach a course on the history of science. You say ‘people like you’ without having any knowledge (apparently) of my educational background, or how I think. You seem to equate skepticism with a closed mind. That displays a gross misunderstanding of the term. Rigorous science demands testing, and the more extraordinary the hypothesis, the more extraordinarily well-tested the evidence must be – this is simply science and it is the arduous route by which every hypothesis ascends toward theory. You’re absolutely right; I did read that somewhere – Science 101. You are using a predictable tactic – deflection via ad hominem attacks. It’s usually an indication of a vacuous argument.
Did you actually suggest that mine is more a couch-potato science? Mine is RIGOROUS science; science without rigor is couch-potato science. Any hypothesis is first and foremost TESTABLE (again, Science 101). There’s no ‘wink wink, nod nod’ in my statement about skeptical thinking; once again, I’m being clear and direct. Who, by the way, is being patronizing (you or I)?
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
The students might well be left without an appreciation for the roles played by observation, experimentation and serendipity. "Mine is RIGOROUS science," sayeth the big wazoo, a jealous god. But he's so Old Testament! We have a new revelation: Love.
Love of music, love of sound, love of discernment. The laws of the priesthood (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) no longer must be imposed upon us. We are free. And should it happen that certain rules of the road (as it were) are discovered, then these may be tested and compiled to strengthen the result. Until then, fair's fair when it comes to play. We don't need no stinkin' schoolmarms with sticks standing over us on the altar.
And then I am further instructed that I began using "ad hominem attacks". Hmmm... Here we have a reply by the high wazoo to my mild question to Ole: "What say ye of people who have opinions on something audio without ever having listened to it?"
Anyone who suspects an 'extensively modified' travel alarm clock placed in one's home to improve an audio system (or TV) is snake oil seems to be employing good judgment in my view (ditto that for this teleportation nonsense).
"Snake oil." "Nonsense." Out of the blue, these things are said to me! To me, the man! Talk about an "ad hominem attack..."
clark
What, pray tell, is ‘ad hominem’ about my reply to your initial query?
Subject – Teleportation Tweak
Your query - "What say ye of people who have opinions on something audio without ever having listened to it?"
My reply – “Anyone who suspects an 'extensively modified' travel alarm clock placed in one's home to improve an audio system (or TV) is snake oil seems to be employing good judgment in my view (ditto that for this teleportation nonsense).”
Interpretation – You posed a question (see your query above). I responded with MY OPINION and clarified it as such by stating “in my view”. My opinion was directed to you – the asker of the question. My opinion was ABOUT a product and those individuals who share MY viewpoint. It was in NO WAY about you. There was nothing, I repeat, NOTHING ad hominem in my statement.
Clarification of a term - An ad hominem attack is one that attacks the character of the holder of an idea instead of the idea itself. For an example, please review your last reply to me in which you called me the following: “jealous god”, Old Testament” and a “schoolmarm”. I hope you can see the difference. You accurately quoted the translation of the Latin phrase as “to the man”, but you apparently fail to understand what that actually means.
Your final statement - "Snake oil." "Nonsense." Out of the blue, these things are said to me! To me, the man! Talk about an "ad hominem attack..." Please explain how this is “out of the blue”? Did you not pose a question (see your query above)? If you don’t want to hear anyone’s opinion, don’t ask such questions. One last time – that was NOT an ad hominem attack; it's called conversation.
My final (and I mean final) statement – Again and again and again, I have asked you to give me ONE good reason why I should NOT be dismissive about the aforementioned tweak. Your only answer has been repeated name-calling. I DO NOT believe in magic. Apparently you do, and you find my incredulity an affront – sorry about that. There are some things that I don’t have to try to know that they won’t work – like jumping off a thirty story building with a cape on my back and flying. If you’re so credulous as to believe that anything is possible, and the only way to *know* the truth about anything is to try it, then why don’t you give THAT a try and let me know how it works out for you!
I’m done.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
I like your sentence Clark:-
> > > "There's a long and undistinguished history there, of inability to tell the difference; whenever new ideas are offered, the entrenched establishment rises as one in their contemptuous cry." < < <
Yes, Clark. The history (of science, of physics, of medicine) makes painful reading - particularly of the contemptuous cries !!! I wish those 'contemptuous' cries were still audible - they would drown out the beautiful music.
And, in a reply to wazoo's 'posting' "Rigorous science demands testing, and the more extraordinary the hypothesis, the more extraordinarily well-tested the evidence must be – this is simply science and it is the arduous route by which every hypothesis ascends toward theory. Any hypothesis is first and foremost TESTABLE."
Clark replied "The students might well be left without an appreciation for the roles played by observation, experimentation and serendipity. Love of music, love of sound. And should it happen that certain rules of the road (as it were) are discovered, then these may be tested and compiled to strengthen the result."
*****************
Of course a hypothesis should be testable, no one could argue against such a laudable sentiment, that is exactly how science can progress, but when the testing has to be done with any of the senses, particularly the hearing, it is amazing how downright reluctant and resistant many people are to try for themselves, even when faced with reassurances from someone who they might usually trust. Nor is it purely reluctance and resistance - it can become more an extreme vendetta, as though for some people the fear of having their belief structure challenged is greater than their desire to have good sound !!!
I am, precisely at this moment, engaged in a such a dialogue (for want of a better word) over on Propeller Head !!
Regards,
May Belt.
1) In science, there is no "should be" in regard to the testability of a hypothesis. It is built into the definition of the term - simple as that.
2) I'm not afraid of trying new things. I have tried a number of things that fractured long-held beliefs. Those things, however, were presented with rational arguments. I have Magneplanar speakers and two examples of the aforementioned are:
A) I tried an arrangement whereby my speakers were set up facing one another and I was facing their sides - amazing nearfield imaging and absolutely no problem with frequency balance.
B) I reversed my panels such that I am now listening to the pole-piece side (through tiny holes in the magnet structure) - more laid back presentation that is otherwise unchanged.
3) The subject in this case is a 'tweak' whereby one dials a number and special signals are transmitted via the phone to the caller with the result that the caller's audio system will be magically improved.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
For a couple of decades I did optical physics and engineering, and no one ever gave us any crap about trusting the eye. But as you say, when it comes to the ear, remonstrances ring loud. (Or so I hear...)
Cherry-picking sentences, as you do, I particularly like this one:
"For some people the fear of having their belief structure challenged is greater than their desire to have good sound !!!"
Such people are heart-dead.
clark
I, likewise, am an anti-federalist.
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/982.html
A preamble to the Main Review
=============================
I didn't wanna do it, I tell ya!! Ya gotta believe me!! Geoff has graciously offered to me a credit for another Teleportation Tweak because I had expressed to him that I didn't want to do mine until I could get together with some friends so as to have more than one opinion to report on, perhaps sometime over the weekend. He was anxious to have me go ahead and do the tweak today because folks on the Internet we're awaiting the results. Well, I hope you guys are happy.What I plan to do next is to gather with some other audiophile friends at someone's house and we'll conduct another trial using their un-Tweaked system. The system I am thinking about is quite resolving and is well set up. Give me a day or so to work out the logistics and I'll report back on the results of that trial...
Now, the main review
====================
I finished auditioning the Teleportation Tweak about 40 minutes ago and I'd like to share my thoughts on it.At the outset of this trial, I promised Geoff that I would approach this with an open mind. I did so. I guess I should also explain that I am generally a skeptical person. I program for a living (a pretty good one, too) and prior to that I had a pretty successful sales career. So, in short, I am pretty good at analyzing things and I'm not easily gulled.
The music used for evaluation:
Pat Metheny's "Imaginary Day", 1st track
Joni Mitchell "Court & Spark", 1st two tracks
Mark Knopfler's "Sailing To Philadephia", title trackI am quite familiar with all these pieces and I feel they give a fair test to a system. The lows on the Pat Metheny disc are downright scary at times. Also, the pinpoint imaging and instrument placement on that album is among the best I've ever heard. Joni's voice, with all its intonations and inflections, is a good standard against which to measure and is music that I've listened to hundreds of times over the past 20-30 years. Mark's duet with James Taylor gives one a chance to hear some great guitar work on top of some great vocal harmonies.
Now for the meat and potatoes, and I *never* sugar-coat my meat and 'taters - I did not hear any change in the sound of the system nor did I perceive any benefit from the Teleportation Tweak. As much as I wanted to hear something, and trust me I *did* (a $60 tweak is a bargain), I must be butally honest with myself and you, dear reader.
Be that as it may, at least I can say that Geoff was completely open and forthright in his dealing with me, and he once again assured me during our phone conversation that he was extending a money-back guarantee if I was not satisified with the efficacy of the Teleportation Tweak. I am not satisfied and I am sure he will honor his word and refund to me the $60. Additionally, I will take him up on his generous offer to give the TT another go on another system - who knows what we may hear??
Test System:
============
HK Signature 2.0 Preprocessor
HK Signature 2.1 5 ch. power amp
Denon 3910 DVD/CD player
Gallo Reference 3.1 - Front L/R
Gallo Due - Center, Rear L/R
Goertz MI-2 speaker cables for 3.1s
MusicBoy/Petra ICs-RW-
...that allows you to hear the dramatic before and after differences. I would welcome a similar opportunity using my Bose wavetable radio. I'm sure that would allow one to hear the true benefits of the teleportation tweak.
A refund has been given. I commend you on your honesty with me, Geoff, thanks.-RW-
RW - Same goes here. BTW, I realize this is a bit off subject, but can you see any improvement to your 51" Hitachi video picture? ....thanks in advance,Geoff
[smile]. I can't say that I do see an improvement in the vidoe quality, but I've only watched a DVD since I did the tweak. The Denon 3910 does do a marvelous job of upscaling DVD, but true HD is the real test. I'll keep an eye on it today and let you know later...
-RW-
If the effects show up on video you should notice it for dvd or a good TV transmission such as Wimbledon matches on ESPN later this morning thru next week. I agree HD should be interesting test.
GK
I used to play for my high school's team and I'm still a big fan of the game. I'll check it out and let you know!
Thanks,
-RW-
At the risk of being accused of coaching the witness :-) here are some tips for what to look for in picture improvements: more intense colors, more solid colors, blacker and more solid blacks, better definition and contrast. For example, weather maps on news channels will be more vivid. Of course, as the tweak has been performed already you'll have to rely on your recollection of what the picture looked like pre-tweak.
GK
"Surprise, surprise surprise!" :-).
Does that surprise you? Or do you believe rlw's results should be given more weight? Serious question.
Or do you believe rlw's results should be given more weight? Serious question.It's not for me to say how much weight others should give to the views of various posters here. I can only state my own views. Also, I don't know who besides rlw has tried this tweak, so I don't know if he is considered to be in the "red state" camp or not, or even what that's supposed to mean. I tend to skip over the posts of those who I consider to have little or no credibility regarding audio matters. That ends up being a large number of people, and the list seems to grow daily. rlw is someone who I feel does have credibility, based on his posts here and elsewhere. So yes, I would tend to weight his results more heavily than the posts of many others.
And one I consider to be most reasonable. I, of course, do the same. I've had so much success with Geoff Kait's products and recommendations that it would be foolish for me to ignore him.
Since you satisfied the first of the condemnations of the believers towards the skeptics ("How do you know if you haven't tried it?") I can only surmise that you failed Number 2 ("Your system simply isn't resolving enough").
Nice try, though!
...is a limiting factor here. My system ain't the best one in the area, but it is far from being muddy, not clear, etc. I easily can hear differences in speaker cables, interconnects, power cords, etc. All in all, it's a pretty darn good system, definitely not "chopped liver".
I have several audiophile friends with what I consider to be pretty good systems, AND I used to sell hi-end gear back in the late 70s, early 80s. I *know* what great gear sounds like, and I *know* how to listen. I'm willing to give the TT another try, this time with more witnesses. Who knows, perhaps they'll clue me in to things I missed on the first go.
But based upon my results on this pass, I'll have to take a pass on the TT for now...
-RW-
My sentiments exactly.
rlw states that he is going to next try the tweak in what he considers to be a high resolution system. He is to be commended for this too IME.
Whether people care to accept it or not, in general, a highly tweaked, high resolution system is going to be more revealing of system changes than the alternative. I state this because my personal efforts to date support such a belief. Do you believe my assertion should be challenged?
Then Geoff should state as much in his ad copy.
Something like: "WARNING: if Wellfed has not examined and approved your choice of audio components, any claim of *not* hearing an improvement will be considered non-credible"
Sorry, but your audio snobbery is showing.
Are you sure it's not your insecurity showing through? Are you?
As for resolution warnings, how do you reliably quantify such a thing? He does note that concept though in some fashion. Next time I bump into it I'll zip you off a message with his phrasing.
Why do you feel the need to question rlw's findings?
After all, it's his subjective opinion.
But you can identify the reason for the Teleportation Tweak's inefficacy in rlw's situation?
It's time for some of that intellectual honesty that you were talking about.
...it is insecurity on your part.
I don't feel the need to, nor did I, question his findings. I'm putting truth out there for anyone willing to accept it; greater resolution equals greater system sensitivity. I wasn't the one who brought the subject up either.
It's time for some of that intellectual honesty that you were talking about.
Honesty is my bag baby, especially intellectual honesty, if you want me to turn up the signal; just ask. I personally think I've been recording pretty hot lately as things stand.
Please read at least the first section of the blog I link to below. I like the part where the blogger briefly describes the relationship between William F. Buckley and John Kenneth Galbraith. There is no good reason why we can't accomplish that type of respect and rapport around here.
> > I don't feel the need to, nor did I, question his findings. < <
You surely did. You took a comment made by rlw about possibly trying the tweak again on a different system to mean that the reason it didn't work the first time was due to a lack of "resolution"... agreement with a prior poster's assertion is the same thing as making the assertion.
> > I'm putting truth out there for anyone willing to accept it; greater resolution equals greater system sensitivity. < <
I thought that "resolution" was one of the goals of reproduction... not a yard-stick to judge the ability to discern the effect of tweaks.
> > I personally think I've been recording pretty hot lately as things stand. < <
Well, I'm glad YOU feel that way.
> > There is no good reason why we can't accomplish that type of respect and rapport around here. < <
I agree.
I have what I consider a few very high resolution systems. I could not detect any difference with the clock or pebbles.
nt
I still have the clock in my possession. The pebbles have gone back to their original owner who IIRC is literally using them as paperweights.
If you'd like some usage tips for BP's please write.
Neither products are/were mine to own. In both cases, I think the owners don't really care about the money (both owned expensive audio systems). But that's conjecture and totally irrelevant. What is relevant is neither of them could make out marked improvements, nor could I.
Sir - My Direct customers receive instructions/directions for my products; Without these instructions/directions, you are shooting blanks in the dark.
Regards, Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
It is meaningless bullsh#t. Anonymous testimonials. Bah! Even if they were real, and I have no reason to believe they are, the statistical significance is unknown. How many people heard... or attempted to hear... the tweak?
People who plop down $60 bucks for a fraud like this wanna believe they didn't get ripped off. Just like people who buy white van speakers wanna believe they got a great deal.
Unfortunately the FTC is (1) gutted and (2) has higher priority fraud cases. But if you want an answer to the question "why are an increasing number of people turned off by high end audio?" this sort of thing is one of the reasons.
Here we are, this forum of hypercerebral audiofile intelligenzia, short coupled to each other via the Internet, and we collectively suspect that something is amiss ...
Why don't we ante up, and place the experimental design in the hands of a couple of universally respected participants to check this remarkable new tweak out?
Hell, count me in for five bucks.
The Good Doctor
Oh, I get it. "Universally respected."
Very funny!
clark
nt
then relishing in the anticipated results of such a experiment. just a thought.
;-)
(nt)
I did a Google search on snippets of the "testimonials", and nothing came up.
I only do this because some testimonials are actually copied from forum sites. Apparently not the case here.
I'd take it as a case of "A tree fell in the forest." I personally take stuff like this with skepticism.
But if one wants to blow three grand on a bunch of doses of the tweak, it's his prerogative. My only comment is "Caveat Emptor."
And if the tweak actually does work, maybe MD ought to improve its marketing tactics. For most people are taking them as sales pitches for snake oil.
It's a universal, timeless personality-type. Remember what they said about heavier-than-air flight?
clark
Surely you don't equate Geoff's efforts with those of the Wright Bros., et al? Or, as you posit in another post, Tesla? It makes you look foolish, laddie.
-RW-
...is the inanity of the knee-jerk reactions against those, and against Machina Dynamica products. Like I said, there's a personality type that prefers to engage in derision and disdain, rather than carry on with something useful like the rest of us.
Two or three years ago I wrote up the MD Intelligent Chip, including accurate, honest reports of how everybody (minus two) who tried it, heard it and liked it -- and even went and bought some of their own. Still the sneering continues.
clark
... products that defy all logic not to mention physic from the known universe !!??
The former is a direct result of the presence of the latter, its as simple as that.
It may *raise* the question, but it doesn't "beg" it. (See URL for correct usage.)
That said, what proof do you offer that MD products are "snake oil" (whatever that is)? Experimental evidence? Published reports?
As for "products that defy all logic", there have been plenty of those already! I'll mention only radio, boats that sail into the wind, and Paris Hilton.
clark
...longer than people have been arguing whether heavier-than-air flight was possible... They KNEW it was possible with proof in the skies.
Come'on! Use a better argument please.
d
Only that history has a way of remembering points of views that were spectacularly wrong (or right)... doesn't point to the view of the majority of intelligentsia at the time. An example;
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Following your argument, one would be led to believe that Mr. Watson's view was the prevalent view at the time (perhaps it was, among the uneducated)... But we all know that NOT to be the case among other people in the industry at the time.
Will you please stop dredging up the past to prove the present. If for no other reason, stop with the logical fallacies.
You want I should dredge up the future?
Guess that "personality type" remark got your goat.
clark
nt
...if you are talking about Teleportation type activities.
But I'm no tweaking sluggard either, I've been incorporating a whole slew of Herbies stuff into my system of late, and good scientist that I am, I'm giving my senses a much needed rest.
Plus, I've been traveling, having grandchildren, saving the world from bad guys, and last, and certainly not least, I find myself up to my eyeballs in aligators with family matters.
Oh yeah, I quit smoking 3 months ago and have been taking out all of my aggressions on bjh. I lead a full life and all I can do right now is grit my teeth and bear it.
.....I would have sworn you were the type of person too smart to indulge in that filthy deadly habit of smoking. I commend you for quitting but I am a tad surprised you ever took it up in the first instance. :o)
Slow down, smile & stop to smell the roses along the journey of life. (now that you can) :p
Smile
Sox
If I had my druthers, I'd still be at it. People I love were starting to become real annoying and I determined the best solution was to accomodate them. I'm not normally inclined to go that direction, but I do love those subwoofers.
......I don’t recall ever seeing the word “druthers” before? I assume it means choice or opinion?
Subwoofers are WAY better than smokes.
Over here there are very few places left where smokers can legally smoke.
Stay on the straight & narrow re smokes & your body will love you for it.
Here endeth today’s lesson.
Smile
Sox
...but yeah, I think I'm starting to feel a tad bit better.
Disclaimer: Part of this post is a joke. ;-)
...you ain't Southern country if you've never heard the phrase "druthers". Next thang ya know, y'all will be telling me you don't know what "yonder" means!
-RW-
....I went Yonder on my honeymoon. Best place I’ve ever been!
Smile
Sox
If I had my druthers, I'd still be at it. People I love were starting to become real annoying and I determined the best solution was to accomodate them. I'm not normally inclined to go that direction, but I do love those subwoofers.
My dad used to smoke 2 packs of Pall Mall non-filter cigarettes per day. He was a big tall guy and had a tendency to overextend himself physically. One day he had a doctor's appointment. The doctor told him based on heart and lung tests that if he didn't quit smoking he would die very soon. He quit that day, cold turkey. However the damage had already been done. The inability of his lungs to take in oxygen, combined with his large physical size and his tendency to overextend himself put a big strain on his heart. He died of heart failure in his mid 60s.
Don't be foolish. Listen to your loved ones. They're saying what they're saying for a good reason. The subwoofers may be great but they won't sound very good if you're dead.
...druthers are druthers, are they not? I don't have any intention of succumbing to temptation though and I truly appreciate your admonition.
nt
My wife had quit 3 months earlier to prepare for oral surgery and now my kids were on me hard to quit like never before, all the while I never felt any more like NOT wanting to quit. Then I saw them, 2 beautiful Zu subwoofers, and this giant sized light bulb turned on in my head. So I said to my wife, with the money we're saving from you not smoking, along with the money we'd save by me not smoking, I think we can afford these, whad'ya think? She said, sure, or something equally enthusiastic.
I ask them how much a pack (or carton of cigarettes cost), do a quick calculation of how much they're spending a year, then ask, could you use an extra $500 ($1000, $2000, whatever it is) a year? Rarely have they ever thought of it that way.
It's worked for me so far. I suppose I could go back on my agreement, but then I'd have hell to pay. Plus, I love those subwoofers.
I could get 'em cheaper from Indians on the net, but I don't wanna have cartons around. I gotta get my lady to quit with me this time. Its very hard when living with someone who smokes. Man, think of all those IC's/smart clocks/blue paper/Mensa rocks/phone-magic I could afford if I quit spending $$ on cigarettes!
$15.50 a day becomes a pretty fair chunk of change at the end of the month. Don't even calculate the yearly value.
We used to pay less than $7.75 a carton twenty years, or so, ago. Recently we were paying $19 +/- $0.50.
ss
.
nt
... which explains why MD gets so many bidders for CLC and other bogus tweaks they sell.
And where do you get your bidder education level demographics?
Teleportation works wonderfully well. The kind of enjoyment. . . Uh? We aren't talking about phone sex?
Nevermind.
.
How's that? ;-)
... and by "Bogus-Tweak" I mean one that is NOT based any sound physic, but more on the supernatural, superstitious and/or psychology :)
The last case? And the one before that? What thinks you Mr. Phooey?
No science has ever proven you can create meaningful changes to the structure of physical matter - no matter how "cleverly" or "brilliantly" the arrangement of sound is - via a frequency range of 300 Hz to 3 KHz at less then 20db (well less then 1db in relation to where the phone is to the audio system).
I am continually astounded how you will defend every MD product. Each new tweak really is more nonsensical then its predecessor.
And yes, I have heard multiple MD products, all of which I have found totally bogus in any of my four systems. I truly have no idea wtf people think they are hearing. This is sheer madness to me.
At least that's what their ads say.
...you can create meaningful changes to the structure of physical matter - no matter how "cleverly" or "brilliantly" the arrangement of sound is - via a frequency range of 300 Hz to 3 KHz at less then 20db."
Or:
A genetic link to agression.
That people are born straight or gay.
The formation of the eye from evolution.
That a steak with a bone tastes better
How bird navigation works.
The cause of the common cold.
How the universe began.
----------------------
And yet, and yet...
clark
In order to fit within the scope of your analogies, you would first need to scientifically prove to us the efficacy of the Machina dynamica Teleportation Twk. Once we have proven the what, we can then proceed to the why and how.
You can proclaim you can fly if you concentrate hard enough. As a scientist, I wouldn't devote any research into your claim unless you can first verify its veracity. Without proof, there is no sense in trying to unravel the mechanisms behind outrageous claims that go contrary to what established science knows.
FYI: Four anonymous, anecdotal, subjective, selected comments does not constitute proof.
I think you and Welfred give Geoff way too much credit as an unparalleled genius with an uncanny gift of amazing discovery. Tesla would be jealous.
I don't "need" to prove anything to you. Who are you, anyway, to make such demands? Some high and mighty schoolteacher-type, is all I can see.
Hey! Here's an idea. Your demand is like what state governments call an "unfunded mandate", as from the Feds. So, you provide the funding to accomplish the "proof" you demand before feeling able to conduct your own experiments (heaven forbid you should have to bother yourself) and I'll get the team together.
Deal?
clark
...let's try to reason with one another then. Let's get the ball rolling with this.
I like Pioneer Elite products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Audio Synthesis products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Atma-Sphere Music Systems products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like numerous after-market power cord, interconnect, and speaker cable products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Köchel products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Golden Sound accessory products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Machina Dynamica products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like many other products not mentioned , with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
How about you?
I enjoyed myself both times.
.
...let's try this route then.
I endorse Pioneer Elite products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Audio Synthesis products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Atma-Sphere Music Systems products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse numerous after-market power cord, interconnect, and speaker cable products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Köchel products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Golden Sound accessory products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Machina Dynamica products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I endorse many other products not mentioned , with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
If you like something, great. If you want to endorse it, fine.
Well how about this?I like and talk about Pioneer Elite products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Audio Synthesis products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Atma-Sphere Music Systems products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about numerous after-market power cord, interconnect, and speaker cable products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Köchel products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Golden Sound accessory products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Machina Dynamica products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Herbies Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Xtreme A/V products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about Marigo Audio Labs products, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
I like and talk about many other products not mentioned here, with all due respect, please tell me why I shouldn't.
Dude, stop. No one is saying you shouldn't like or shouldn't talk about anything. I'm not sure what part of my previous answers were unclear.
I am continually astounded how you will defend every MD product. Each new tweak really is more nonsensical then its predecessor.
I like Machina Dynamica products.
You like Machina Dynamica products.
I am amazed that you defend all their products (and find them effective).
Notice there is no imperatives in either statement. Both your statement and mine are declaratives.
...you haven't found them effective?
Oh, I get it. You haven't even tried them!
Then, sir, *I* am amazed that you speak out so emphatically from a position of utter ignorance.
Or... am I?
clark
...and didn't note as much as a change.
e
There are such things as indirect speech acts....I say (to my kid), I don't like you staying out so damn late all the time. When I say that, I could be meaning...You should not stay out so late or Don't stay out so late. Even the "should" statement is not an imperative. The "don't" however is, and she usually gets my drift.
I can’t say I heard any improvement, but then again it didn’t make things worse, either. Out of morbid curiosity, I tried the picture-in-the-freezer thing too. Same result, though it did make ME look better in the picture—which, considering my rather poor DNA structure, is a hell of an achievement!!! I can use all the molecular rearrangement I can get. :)
Papa wheeled me into this tent full of screaming people. I was terrible scared especially when Papa wheeled me up front where there was this crasy man screaming and hollering louder than everyone else.
Then that mean man grabbed me and started a' shaking me. I was so scared I jumped up and ran and ran. All I remember was all those people clapping and a' going outta their minds as I got away.
I never forgave Papa for bringing me there.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
I've always assumed there was a frightened little child hiding beneath that sinewy veneer.
I'm just asking for it here, am I not? ;-)
Actually I think that rather accurately captures your MO! :)
(Politeness prevents me from speculating on the possible psychological implications.)
---
Just out of curiosity if you don't mind, do you suppose the day will ever comes when you'll wake up, stretch, and say to yourself... "I think I let someone else lead the battle in defense of {name of some wacky tweak}."?
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
I consider the war against ignorance to be of critical importance.
And which side do you believe you're on?
Really?
...and when I come out—we will know many things...
... of just about anything. Picture-in-the-freezer, anyone?
`
I do know from my minimal study of psych statistics that trying to prove anything with a self-selected sample of 4 simply isn't possible.
Apart from not being able to tell whether anonymous responses are real, you have no idea how many negative reports were received and not posted on the site.
Giving everyone the benefit of the doubt, you've got 4 happy people out of how many who have tried the tweak? This sort of anecdotal evidence simply can't be used to show anything apart from the fact that 4 people were happy with the results.
David Aiken
.
I doubt it.
.
Just my educated guess mind you. ;-)
could be completely made up quotes, or could be shills. No way to tell unless you spend your money. A just as educated guess :-)
No way to tell unless you spend your money.
And in the case of this particular product, there is no fear over wasting postal costs if the customer is not satisfied. Just a 'I feel so silly doing this' to get over for some.
But know ye this
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Okay, I've gone too far now, but the principle IS there.
pt barnum was right.
Which is the more scary option?
nt
How much is this thing?
Maybe we should club together and buy one and find out...
Bit radical for some but then...
But yes, I do believe men can fly.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: