|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.53.159.98
Over on Audioholics for the most part they agree that Mapleshade makes CDs that are usually of extreme high quality and albeit with a slightly audible tape hiss because they are recorded using analog 1/2" tape without noise reduction.Yet they berate the owners claims of his tweaks, wires etc as being "snake oil!" So they will highly recommend their CDs, but will not recommend anything else that they offer.
That doesn't make sense to me?????? If you read the cataloge Mapleshade mails out the man who's making the recording says these are the tweaks that I use when recording. You agree he makes wonderfully high quality CDs & LPs yet write of his stated reasons for obtaining these recordings as "snake oil" because you don't agree with the tweaks, while admiting he makes great recordings?
Now if that isn't assinine I don't know what is.
Thetubeguy1954
Follow Ups:
I've got a Judy and the Jazzmakers CD on Coherent Records;this is about a realistic sound as you'll get out of Redbook CD. I think Don Morrison had something to do with it, which means No Tweaks.Simplicity is the key; only two good mikes and as little else as you can manage. Who knows,the Mapleshades might be as good or better without the tweaks.
No it's not asinine! Just because the recordings sound good doesn't in anyway mean the tweaks used in the manufacturing and sold along side the disks will make any difference at all.Can we assume you'ld be lining up to defend and then buy blessed water if Mapleshade claimed they used it in the manufacturing of the "good sounding" CDs?
asinine – adjective
1. foolish, unintelligent, or silly; stupid: It is surprising that supposedly intelligent people can make such asinine statements.I'd like to propose a new forum called "Numbskull Narrows" were asinine threads such as this one can be moved.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
I don't think many will have a problem admitting there is an audible difference between certain parts. It is just a matter of degrees. Maybe one guy can hear the difference between a cheap carbon pot and a good stepped attenuator. Maybe another can also hear the difference between a poor a quality resistor or coupling cap and top notch ones. Maybe someone else can hear the difference between poor quality chinese tubes and the best of the NOS ones.But everyone has a point where they say this is "snake oil". For some it is caps and resistors, others interconnects and speaker cables. Me? Well I don't have any magic pebbles and I don't freeze my CD's nor any special clock to improve sound. I don't even buy fancy cables but I do make my own sometimes. But moving a speaker just a few inches can be quite audible depending on circumstances.
IMHO the better the circuit design is the less critical parts quality becomes. For example a fully differential circuit might make power supply quality not as important as it would be in a normal SET amp.
> IMHO the better the circuit design
> is the less critical parts quality
> becomes. For example a fully differential
> circuit might make power supply quality
> not as important as it would be in a normal
> SET amp.Yep. Component values are way more important than
component materials ....
"But moving a speaker just a few inches can be quite audible depending on circumstances."Much more so than the goofy stuff that credophiles claim makes a jaw-dropping difference. MUCH more so.
"IMHO the better the circuit design is the less critical parts quality becomes."
Yes, that is 1000% correct, but the goof who builds some tweaky p.o.s. is denied the hours of entertainment he gets swapping parts in and out of a badly designed circuit, trying to get it to perform half-decently. It's unstable high distortion high Z circuits that are "particularly revealing of cable differences," and are thus treasured and held up as examples of "improvement."
"Yes, that is 1000% correct, but the goof who builds some tweaky p.o.s. is denied the hours of entertainment he gets swapping parts in and out of a badly designed circuit, trying to get it to perform half-decently. It's unstable high distortion high Z circuits that are "particularly revealing of cable differences," and are thus treasured and held up as examples of "improvement."So; do you really think anyone will see themselves in that statement? and if so will they have the courage to admit it?
d.b.
Should have read:"...the goof who would otherwise have built some tweaky p.o.s. is denied the hours of entertainment..."
Just like a quality sports car is NEVER touchy about what gas you use in it.
a
No, but a quality car to allow you to drive cross country and through Mexico should not be touchy about its gas or you'll be stranded; as with all engineering, "quality" is relative to the specified task.
Nope.
According to JC , Porsches are never to be used on bumpy roads or even when raining...The same way high-end audio equipment shall not have to work in an EMI/RFI perturbated environment, or fed by noisy or irregular mains.
Some equipments will work fine, some others won't and it's the customer's business (!), not at all the manufacturer who is bothered when their equipment has to comply to some standards to be sold to us untrusty and immoral europeans...
See here .
The whole thread is funny and revealing to read.
My '65 Valiant slant 6 could do that quite easily.
> Yet they berate the owners claims of his tweaks, wires etc as being
> "snake oil!" So they will highly recommend their CDs, but will not
> recommend anything else that they offer.> That doesn't make sense to me?????? If you read the cataloge Mapleshade
> mails out the man who's making the recording says these are the tweaks
> that I use when recording. You agree he makes wonderfully high quality
> CDs & LPs yet write of his stated reasons for obtaining these recordings
> as "snake oil" because you don't agree with the tweaks, while admiting he
> makes great recordings?> Now if that isn't assinine I don't know what is.
Your reasoning that because the CDs are good therefore all the products are good is foolish.
I do not know the man nor am I able to judge the merits of his CDs in terms of artistic or production quality. Setting aside my doubts for arguments sake, lets assume the quality is excellent, the man has a passion for the music but the CDs do not make enough money for him to pay the rent and his kids school fees.
Selling high profit margin products that benefit from the association with the CDs would be one way to stay in a business he is passionate about. Obviously it is not possible for a small part time enterprise working on the side to sell real audio products at high profit margin but it is possible to sell "snake oil" so long as you are prepared to make the compromises. If you do so then your credibility will be lost with the mainstream and so in for a penny, in for a pound. You might as well tell real porkies like speaker cables and speaker stands make more difference than the active device if it helps sales.
Do you believe promotional material about a product is going to be honest and impartial or is it shifted in favour of putting the product in a good light? If the latter where is the line drawn for big established companies and small one man enterprises with nothing to lose?
Why if these high profit margin audio products work as claimed don't the big established companies step in and make enormous profits?
Do you see all this but suppress it in order to find things to support what you would like to believe or do you simply not see it at all?
..don't the big established companies step in and make enormous profits?"Aw c'mon now Andy,
Because they are too busy "preying" on folks with sinister "crap" like $100 CD players, according to resident super ears hero Clark "Kent" Johnsen, who can leap tall buildings and have no problems with one hearing the differences between Red and Blue power cords http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/24458.html
Plus, if they slapped a Sony logo on the very brass feet being sold by Dr. Mapleshady, they would immediately sound cold and sterile, not "the improvement in bass, midrange and treble over any of the famous mountings is not subtle" (the only other "famous" mounting that I am aware of was that Katherine the Great chic and I think that was a myth too).
One of the dilemas of listening with the eyes. Right Clark? LOLcheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
I didn't have any trouble distinguishing the difference between the red and blue OM power cords in most cases.* Neither would you. I mean, you can't be that deaf.* Depends on the direction of the transformer winding, IIRC. No transformer, probably no difference.
:-)
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
But since your system isn't, there's no way to tell.
So is the reason for "audibilty" of two power cords is the change in polarity of the transformer and not the power cord color?
d.b.
It's a function of wire directionality. From the data sheet accompanying the cables (sold in pairs, one of which to be returned after listening to them in the specific link): "The only technical difference between the Red and Blue options is in the crystal grain orientation of the copper ribbon conductors. We ... use the same ribbon -- but in opposite direction -- for the Red and Blue options."Thinking about it, this does presume that the listener has a reasonably resolving system in the first place or the difference would indeed be inaudible. But it's not a very high threshold.
I am not going bother to comment further.
d.b.
What a surprise.
What about the great recordings that are made *without* Dr. Dementia's props? How are those to be explained?You expect him to SELL all these products and then claim "Oh BTW, none of this s**t is really audible, or negligible at best....but buy it anyway!" LOL.
The people who take advantage of the easily influenced minds are not dumb. Far from it. Most are probably quite intelligent, like this fellow. Or at least "street" smart. Unscrupulous? Maybe. Dumb? No.Cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA,I was wondering how long it was going to take you to jump on the Objectivist shoot-down-the Subjectivist-post bandwagon!
To your question of: What about the great recordings that are made *without* Dr. Dementia's props? How are those to be explained? I'd respond that I don't know, do you? How can ANYONE without knowing how these supposedly well-made recordings were made, comment on them? What I can comment on is how quickly you resort to name calling though an educated man like Dr Sprey! What's the matter? Can't make statement about something you disagree about without resorting to making jokes at the person's expensnse?
===================================================================
You expect him to SELL all these products and then claim "Oh BTW, none of this s**t is really audible, or negligible at best....but buy it anyway!" LOL.I cannot believe you don't have the ability to see beyond your own opinions. How about this senerio? Dr Pierre Sprey leaves the Pentagon & starts his own label, Mapleshade. Being a music lover, Dr Sprey constantly strives to find any & everyway possible to make the recording more realistic. Being a lot more open-minded than you and many of the other Objectivists here, he attempts different tweaks i.e. using brass as a vibration-controlling media or using different wires to see if any "sound" better than others.
Now after listening and using his ear as the final arbitrator Dr Sprey discovers certain tweaks actually do improve the realism of his recordings. Then just like I would "IF" I could find a tweak that I believed improved the realism of my systems replication of the music, Dr Sprey offers it for sale to other music lovers! His character is displayed in his guarantee of performance and the return of your money if you don't agree.
===================================================================
The people who take advantage of the easily influenced minds are not dumb. Far from it. Most are probably quite intelligent, like this fellow. Or at least "street" smart. Unscrupulous? Maybe. Dumb? No.You amaze me with how you so easily insult people, Dr Sprey, me (because I know these tweaks work and don't have the insulting easily influenced mind as you call it) I offered to PROVE to you AJinFLA, RBG & Pat D that I can hear differences in wires, differences in tubes say a Mullard, Siemans or RCA 12AU7 etc. I can understand Pat D & RBG not taking me up as they live so far away, but you live fairly close AJinFLA so why not allow me to PROVE IT to you? You make all this claims yet are too afraid to have your opinions disproven! I'm willing to provide proof, if you're so sure I'm wrong come and watch me, but get ready to admit you say me PROVE what I said I could.
The threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of Objectivist bullshit - TS
Thetubeguy1954
d
just got better...
a
AGREED! I have a Pioneer home-theater receiver that I bought for my wife as a Christmas present. She uses Monsoon Audio FPF-1000's for the front channels and a pair of their multi-media computer speakers that use the exact same ribbom tweeter that's in the FPF-1000 & 3" woofer for the rear channels.Even my wife who is deathly afraid of those large 845 tubes in my Mastersound instantly recognized how much better her CD's sound on MY system as opposed to her system! Her system is great for DVD movies and just ok for music.
I cannot believe the disservice people like RBG do to the newbies. Anyone if FLA can contact me about paying a visit and comparing the two different systems (soon to be 3 different systems) with the return of my Audio Analoge Puccini, when my wife returns from visiting her family Colombia.
s
Yes the great benefit to audio is for golden ears to compare two components playing at different volumes and then claim they sound different. What a surprise!Another great benefit to audio is to claim that all components sound different when not one out of hundreds of brave audiophiles who have tested this belief over three decades was able to come close to validating the belief.
So tell audiophiles to trust their ears even though when audiophiles compare a component to itself (when thinking there are two different components being compared) they claim to hear differences 50% to 75% of the time when no differences are possible!
Let the audio fantasies continue -- attack all objective experiements when their results don't support pre-existing beliefs. It's all about the ego-building fantasy: "I know what I hear and I don't have to prove it to anyone else."
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
When you consider the massive abuse some of these people have subjected their hearing to, deafening live rock concerts, the audible equivalent of staring straight into the sun, the idea that they have "golden ears" is laughable. What's remarkable is that they can still hear anything at all. And then to have the audacity of some of them to claim that they can design superior equipment by the way it sounds to them is ludicrous. To them, any equipment which doesn't cause the ringing in their ears to start back up is good. Small wonder they like sound systems with components which roll off high frequencies such as from vacuum tubes and phonograph records. Those with the worst case of tinnitis even prefer the sound of 78 RPMs because they have no sound abouve 5 khz.
RBG,Your Lunatic Fringe Objectivist views are getting crazier & crazier! You continually rant that no one has or can prove they hear differences in components, yet you come up with a myriad of reasons of why you won't come and let me provide you PROOF, that I can do that very thing!
You are looking more and more foolish with every passing post Ranting RBG, King of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists!
RBG:
"Listen up little wifey: I'm King of this here Castle,
and you're nothing"Little Wifey:
"That makes you King of nothing"
.
.
.
First I'd like proof that you're not drinking or using mind-altering medications. If you are, I hereby confiscate whetever you have for "tests":My posts claim that blind test results can not identify the existence of even one real golden ear. I do not claim all components sound the same. It is the golden ear wackos who claim all components sound different ... but have no proof beyond "I know what I hear".
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
> It is the golden ear wackos who claim all components sound different ... but have no proof beyond "I know what I hear". <And
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, which is the mantra of every good objectivist, yourself included. Logically I don't disagree with this statement although in practice I accept no such burden.
What's the difference? A lot, on the surface. But let's dig:
When objectivists are asked for proof that all wire sounds the same, they correctly respond that there is no way they can prove this because to do so would require them comparing each and ever wire in each and every system.
Now it appears you're asking us to prove that all components sound different. Unless I'm mistaken, we have the same problem of proof for the same reason. There's no way we could prove that all components sound different. I figured that now that you're The King (thenkya - thenkya verra mush - thenkya!) perhaps you can explain this to me, Yer Highness! And you're right - being king of something isn't necessarily a good thing. The Bonzo Dog Doodah Band sang a song called "King of Scurf" which was about a guy with a hellacious amount of dandruff. :)
> When objectivists are asked for proof that all wire sounds the same,
> they correctly respond that there is no way they can prove this
> because to do so would require them comparing each and ever wire in
> each and every system.Here you betray your lack of knowledge about the basis of science. Scientists and engineers do not reason by performing experiments, they reason using laws that have been observed to hold (although often within limits). In fact, the ability to predict is not an option but a requirement for doing science.
In order to answer your question you probably need no more knowledge than a school child opting for the science streams (which may let you off the hook?). A knowledge of the basic lumped electrical characteristics of the wires, input and output impedances and speaker efficiencies will allow you to determine a dB versus frequency difference due to changing cables. Comparing this against published data on audibility studies (proper data in peer reviewed scientific journals not the promotional nonsense in audiophile publications) will allow one to establish where the differences due to the cables lie relative to the threshold of audibility.
So long as the worst case combination (easy to determine for simple electrical circuits) for the range of electrical parameters under consideration creates differences well below the threshold of audibility then the case is proven so long as the laws and assumptions made hold.
Of course, for "normal" combinations of audio components the predicted differences will lie below the threshold of audibility. This requires the cable believer to prove the assumptions are wrong and not just slightly wrong but substantially wrong. Now claiming that science does not hold when applied to audiophile hardware may be quite common in audiophile circles but it would be fun seeing someone try to make it stick in the real world or a court of law.
Of course there are caveats which is why the word normal or some equivalent needs to be included. In fact, it is not particularly difficult to exploit the abnormal to win the money from the cable challenges that allow you to use your own equipment, cables and sources. I am slightly surprised that nobody has done so although the few thousand typically on offer is not a lot and there must be quite a high probability that the individuals putting up the money would get annoyed at being "tricked" and not pay up.
Did you have bad childhood experiences with subjectivists or Humanites majors, a little bullying perhaps? I find your attempts at insults humorous. If science types all turn out pretentious such as yourself, I'm glad I studied music. :)I think the issue between subjectivists and objectivists is that the former takes the music approach while the latter looks at the science. Are you up for Tubeguy proving his listening skills or are you the type that hides from potential proof since in this case it involves listening instead of a bunch of number crunching?
Proof we objectivists are not all the same:Most people find my attempts at humor insulting!
Objective audiophiles are the most subjective listeners of all:
We try to compare components playing at the same volumes and hide the brand names because we know they can bias an audition.We want to judge components ONLY by their sound quality -- that's why we try to reduce the possibility of imagined differences which seem to be quite common.
Our goal is to have audiophiles better understand their true ability to differentiate among wires and electronics.
We have found our own abilities to differentiate among wires and electronics do not seem to come close to matching our ability to hear differences among speakers and rooms.
That implies speakers and rooms are more important than wires and electronics if better sound quality is a primary goal. Test results so far suggest they are much more important.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG states:1) Objective audiophiles are the most subjective listeners of all (That's ONLY in your mind RBG! You are hardly a subjective listener)
2) We try to compare components playing at the same volumes and hide the brand names because we know they can bias an audition. (The operative word is WE TRY! And "if" bias can effect an audition so much, why do I sometimes prefer the sound of a component I didn't expect to, because it was cheaper or I prefered the looks of another component? Try telling the truth PLEASE!)
3) We want to judge components ONLY by their sound quality -- that's why we try to reduce the possibility of imagined differences which seem to be quite common. (Perhaps the possibility of imagined differences is quite common for YOU and those of your ilk, but not for me and those I associate with.)
4) Our goal is to have audiophiles better understand their true ability to differentiate among wires and electronics. (Your Lunatic Fringe Objectivists beliefs goals are to be right (even when you aren't) knowing the truth plays no part in your goals.
5) We have found our own abilities to differentiate among wires and electronics do not seem to come close to matching our ability to hear differences among speakers and rooms. (Need to better train your ears than lad.)
6) That implies speakers and rooms are more important than wires and electronics if better sound quality is a primary goal. (Only in RBG World is such an implication made.)
7) Test results so far suggest they are much more important. (What tests results? Some specifics please, done by whom, when and where? RBG please regale us with your extensive knowledge of tests of speakers vs wires and how the results provided proof that so far suggest they are much more important. I'll be waiting.....)
... no matter how many times I shake my leg!)
Personal knowledge of how well one can differentiate among components with brand names hidden and A-B volumes carefully matched can only help an audiophile make better (future) purchase decisions.Gaining real self-knowledge through objective tests is never a disadvantage ... except in your golden ear audio fantasy world where "I know what I hear" is never tested, so it can never be refuted (just like claiming to have a 160 IQ but refusing to ever take an IQ test!)
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
> ...speakers and rooms are more important than wires and electronics if better sound quality is a primary goal <
> Are you up for Tubeguy proving his listening skills or are you the
> type that hides from potential proof since in this case it involves
> listening instead of a bunch of number crunching?I think you have still missed the point about what proof means. If you believe (and know about) what science has established concerning the behaviour of electrical circuits and audibility then there is no need to perform experiments to determine what will happen. This is the whole point of science and why so many people spend so much of their time using and refining scientific knowledge.
In your case you do not possess the relevant knowledge even though it is at late school level for those with a scientific inclination. No insult is meant by this and I do not possess late school level knowledge in many arts subjects. The point is that the knowledge is common and useable by most with a scientific inclination.
Where you are strongly at fault is not understanding what scientific knowledge is, how it works and why people with scientific knowledge can perceive things about a scientific subject that you cannot. In this respect you are a bigot in considering your ill informed subjective view to be correct when applied to subjects which lie in the domain covered by science. Just as much a bigot as the "objectivists" you criticise who claim that blinded sound perception is the true perception.
So the answer to your question is no. Nobody with a technical knowledge about the performance of cables and sound perception will waste their time with people like Tubeguy once he has made it clear that he has no desire to understand what is going on. Like you I find it odd that so many people still post trying to correct his statements given his previous record of responses whatever his fascination maybe as an example of an extreme audiophile.
> So the answer to your question is no. Nobody with a technical knowledge about the performance of cables and sound perception will waste their time with people like Tubeguy once he has made it clear that he has no desire to understand what is going on. <Fine. You and those like you have just guaranteed that this debate will continue ad infinitum. I have no problem with that. I'm sure Tubeguy will understand that no amount of practical proof can undo what years of scientific training has instilled. I find that frightening but it is what it is.
> Where you are strongly at fault is not understanding what scientific knowledge is, how it works and why people with scientific knowledge can perceive things about a scientific subject that you cannot. <
I'm not concerned (at the moment) with perceiving things about a scientific subject so much as I am fascinated by your implication that someone cannot prove the science to be incorrect, particularly in light of your comment that many scientists refine their scientific knowledge. The only thing that makes sense to me is that you must be saying that there is no way that Tubeguy could tell one component from another blind and therefore since you know the outcome, you aren't interested in the experiment. True?
> Fine. You and those like you have just guaranteed that this debate will
> continue ad infinitum.What debate? There is no debate about how cables perform and there never has been as far as I am aware. They are about the simplest electrical component there is and their behaviour does not get particularly complicated even under conditions where simple lumped parameters are inadequate to describe their behaviour.
> I have no problem with that. I'm sure Tubeguy will understand that no amount
> of practical proof can undo what years of scientific training has instilled. I
> find that frightening but it is what it is.It would only require one piece of evidence that the known laws governing the behaviour of cables at audible frequencies are wrong to have a truly awesome impact on the scientific world. Without a question it would be the biggest scientific discovery of all time because there is no indication that anything is wrong. Science almost always knows where the gaps in knowledge lie long before they are filled in and many extremely clever well educated people spend their working lives striving to fill those gaps.
> I'm not concerned (at the moment) with perceiving things about a scientific
> subject so much as I am fascinated by your implication that someone cannot
> prove the science to be incorrect, particularly in light of your comment that
> many scientists refine their scientific knowledge.It is utterly straightforward for anybody to gather scientifically valid data. Much as I hate to mention it, it is taught in schools and can also be looked up on the internet under the scientific method if you were off sick that day.
Tubeguy has no interest in providing valid scientific data or in finding out what would make his data valid. That is his choice but the consequence is that nobody with an understanding of what is and what is not valid scientifically will take any interest in his results. Of course, should he ever decide to gather valid data he will be disappointed to find that his results are the same as millions of other people who have quietly performed similar actions before him.
> The only thing that makes sense to me is that you must be saying that there is
> no way that Tubeguy could tell one component from another blind and therefore
> since you know the outcome, you aren't interested in the experiment. True?I am sure he can hear the difference between many types of components under blind conditions. However, if he can hear the difference between two "normal" audio cables using "normal" stable audio equipment under blind conditions then this would be a unique achievement which will astound both science and myself. I would judge the chances he can do this or is even interested in attempting it in a valid manner as zero hence my lack of interest.
nt
andy19191,You're problem and yes it is a problem is you honestly believe EVERYTHING can be measured. Thus your mistaken belief of "...if (thetubeguy) can hear the difference between two "normal" audio cables using "normal" stable audio equipment under blind conditions then this would be a unique achievement which will astound both science and myself."
You seem to forget that unlike you, I believe that just because we cannot measure a difference heard it doesn't automatically mean we are "fooling ourselves" or being influenced by "expecation bias" etc. I believe there are things happening, due to human perceptions being involved, that we don't know how to measure yet. Hell even Einstein (I slightly more intelligent man than you) said: "Not everything that can be counted counts, & not everything that counts can be counted." I like to rephrase that for audio as "Not everything that can be measured matters, & not everything that matters can be measured."
So perhaps if you opened the closed mind just a crack you wouldn't judge the chances of what I can do, before seeing a test performed! Your zero lack of interest, is quite typical of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists here who don't want the truth, they want to be right (even when they aren't.)
Thetubeguy1954
> You're problem and yes it is a problem is you honestly believe EVERYTHING
> can be measured.I am glad you have put me straight on that. There was me believing quite the opposite and even wittering on about problems being in the scientific domain in this branch of the thread. It is a pity you cannot go back and correct it to what I should have said.
> Thus your mistaken belief of "...if (thetubeguy) can hear the difference
> between two "normal" audio cables using "normal" stable audio equipment
> under blind conditions then this would be a unique achievement which will
> astound both science and myself."Where is the belief? It is a simple statement of fact that nobody has ever come forward to claim any of the prizes for hearing valid differences between cables and, as far as I am aware, nobody has ever presented valid results for peer review of people hearing differences between cables using "normal" cables and "normal" stable audio equipment. You would be the first.
> You seem to forget that unlike you, I believe that just because we cannot
> measure a difference heard it doesn't automatically mean we are "fooling
> ourselves" or being influenced by "expecation bias" etc. I believe there
> are things happening, due to human perceptions being involved, that we
> don't know how to measure yet.Do you believe that we change an acoustical signal and measure it by an amount smaller than we can perceive by ear?
Do you believe we can ask someone whether they perceive two sounds to be audibly the same or different and get a reply?
What else do you believe is fundamentally necessary to measure if people can perceive audible differences?
> So perhaps if you opened the closed mind just a crack you wouldn't judge
> the chances of what I can do, before seeing a test performed!I am estimating your chances as being pretty much the same as everyone elses. To date it has been 100% one way and 0% the other. I wish you luck in bucking the trend but the odds aren't good.
> Your zero lack of interest, is quite typical of the Lunatic Fringe
> Objectivists here who don't want the truth, they want to be right (even
> when they aren't.)I am afraid you cannot force people to be interested you will have to find a way to tempt them on their terms. If you can come up with unexpected and valid scientific data you will get a lot of interest from the scientific community. If you proclaim unexpected results but based on invalid data you will get little to no interest particularly if the path has been well trodden before. And the path for claims about magic cables has been well and truly worn out since their invention at the end of the hifi boom.
andy19191 to all your cries of appeal to the authority of science I repeat even Einstein (I slightly more intelligent and scientific man than you) said: "Not everything that can be counted counts, & not everything that counts can be counted." I like to rephrase that for audio as "Not everything that can be measured matters, & not everything that matters can be measured."People like you never get that simple truth... Oh well believe what you will. My system doesn't suffer for your beliefs, yours does.
You're no Einstein!
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
No where did I say I was like Einstein! All I said was Einstein's quote of: "Not everything that can be counted counts, & not everything that counts can be counted." I would like to rephrase for audio as "Not everything that can be measured matters & not everything that matters can be measured."Now as you are obviously too uneducated to know this allow me to inform you that counted could equal measured, in some circumstances. If we check Merriam Webster we'll see:
Entry Word: measure
Function: verb
Text: to find out the size, extent, or amount of for this experiment, you need to carefully measure all the chemicals before you mix them together
Synonyms gauge (also gage), scale, span
Related Words weigh; calibrate; lay off, mark (off); calculate, compute, figure, reckon, work out; conjecture, estimate, guess, judge, suppose; add up, sum, tally, total; ascertain, discover, dope (out), figure out, find outRBG did you notice measure means to: Text: to find out the size, extent, or amount of? So could not one simply count the amount of marbles in a bag to know their true count or measure ?
Next most everyone knows that what matters can be refered to as what counts, in that it is something that needs to be considered.
Now in that light it's easy to see how Einstein's quote of: "Not everything that can be counted counts, & not everything that counts can be counted." could be rephrased for the purpose of audio as "Not everything that can be measured matters & not everything that matters can be measured."
But then again we all know you don't really care about the truth you only want to look correct, even when you are wrong!
... at least compared with my average joke.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
> My system doesn't suffer for your beliefs, yours does. <They don't believe or they don't hear, they don't want to and they have no interest in actively pursuing the proof they clamor for. The objectivist POV holds no more mysteries and certainly no appeal.
As there's nothing more you can do for them, I suggest you just let 'em suffer... and I'm going to take my own advice.
Are we suffering because we bought solid state amps with minimal distortion instead of your wretched 10% distortion favorites? Does my system suffer because I put more money into the speakers than in the speaker wire? Are we suffering for putting money into the things that count, including more music, instead of useless tweaks? I think not!
> Are we suffering because we bought solid state amps with minimal distortion instead of your wretched 10% distortion favorites? <Of course! Why would you even want solid state when there are 10% distortion favorites out there???
> Does my system suffer because I put more money into the speakers than in the speaker wire? <
As any audiophile worth their salt will tell you, you must spend MORE money as you go downstream. So if you own $5000 speakers, your speaker wire must be at least $6000 with your amp at $7000, $7500 for the amp-to-preamp cable, $8000 for your preamp and $10,000 for the CDP. You MIGHT be able to get by with the same $7500 interconnect between preamp and CDP. I'll check the official Audiophile Rules of Engagement book and get back to you.
> Are we suffering for putting money into the things that count, including more music, instead of useless tweaks? <
Oh, come on! Useless tweaks are WAY more important than music! I sold all my music to buy more useless tweaks. So even though I haven't been able to play anything through it, my system sounds WAY better than yours!
:-)
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
You'll find that, despite his protestations, TG54 doesn't really want to do a controlled blind test of statistical significance. When you get down to brass tacks, he balks. I notice he has totally ignored your remarks about using measuring equipment to see how the cables are functioning.As well, not using a good fast switcher like the ABX comparator will reduce the sensitivity of the test.
It's very strange. He has no proof but only promises it in the future if certain people will come down for it.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
... then it seems very unlilkely that other audiophiles can easily differentiate among components playing at the same volumes when they know the brand names in use, a listening skill they claim to have.There's no logical reason to expect that audiophiles who listen with brand names hidden can't hear as well as audiophiles who refuse to test their hearing skills ... and many good reasons to believe that audiophiles in general are biased toward reporting that any two components sound different and/or mistaking small SPL differences for meaningful sound quality differences.
I'm still seeking proof from any audiophile in the world that he possesses the skill to differentiate between two wires ... and I've been waiting for over three decades!
So far the best "proof" is TubeNut claiming he COULD hear wire differences if he tested himself, DEMANDING that I travel across the country to his home, where he would PROVE IT to me.
That's no better "proof" than the typical golden ear boast:
"I know what I hear".
.
.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG,Loves to LIE! Realtime BS Generator falsely claims: "I'm still seeking proof from any audiophile in the world that he possesses the skill to differentiate between two wires ... and I've been waiting for over three decades!" I've told this LIAR point blank that I have tested myself and I detected differences. What we are really waiting decades for is for RBG to stop LYING and admit that proof has been provided to him, but he refuses to accept it! This is witnessed below for after all I do LYING RBG claims: "So far the best "proof" is TubeNut claiming (not claiming stating) he COULD hear wire differences if (not if, everytime I test myself) he tested himself, DEMANDING (not demanding like the LIAR says but offering) that I travel across the country to his home, where he would PROVE IT to me."
LYING RBG!
Thetubeguy1954
> So far the best "proof" is TubeNut claiming he COULD hear wire differences if he tested himself, DEMANDING that I travel across the country to his home, where he would PROVE IT to me. <We have a person, Tubeguy, that has offered up his home and his hospitality to any objectivist that wants to get a firsthand look at proof in action. What could possibly be better than that?
RBG, I know you're not strictly a number cruncher like Andy19191 appears to be. I know you're a music lover and I would think this kind of proof would be second to none in your world. It sure as hell would be in mine.
Where are the witnesses to TubeNut's hearing ability claims?Where is even one witness?
Where are test results for even one test without witnesses?
A single-blind A-B interconnect or AC cord comparison could be done in one hour, with one helper, at no cost. The results could be reported here with five minutes of typing -- maybe ten minutes for TubeNut.
Offering up your home for a demonstration is proof of nothing.
Proof requires completed testing with positive results.
Not a future test.
A completed test.
Even then there would be a small probability of lucky guessing.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Realtime BS Generator,You are a LIAR! You ask, Where are the witnesses to TubeNut's hearing ability claims? Where is even one witness?
You know the answer because I've told you. In fact I've answered this question more than once:
1) My friends in Conn witnessed my "hearing abilities"
2) People in CFAS (Central Florida Audio Society witnessed my "hearing abilities" as well!You know this RBG, but just won't accept it. It's not "GOOD ENOUGH" for you. That's precisely why I have offered to PROVIDE PROOF PERSONALLY for you. I thought maybe seeing is believing, but I doubt that would even convince you. You don't want the truth, you want to be right (even if you aren't)
Now being the Realtime BS Generator you LIE again! You claim "A single-blind A-B interconnect or AC cord comparison could be done in one hour, with one helper, at no cost. The results could be reported here with five minutes of typing -- maybe ten minutes for TubeNut."
I've done it and passed here it is in print for RBG to see, if he ever claims again I haven't answered this question it will be yet another LIE!
Now as far as these comments are concerned:
A) Offering up your home for a demonstration is proof of nothing. (It's proof, Realtime BS Generator, you haven't got the guts to learn the truth.)
B) Proof requires completed testing with positive results. (Been there, done that, even have a T-Shirt that says so!)
C) Not a future test. (A future would teach you the truth and hopefully stop all your LIES! Like I said, you are a LIAR!)
4) A completed test. (See 1 & 2 above)
5) Even then there would be a small probability of lucky guessing. (Typical Offical Lunatic Fringe Objectivist trump card! If there is a real differnece heard it's because 1) they guessed, 2) the wire's faulty or 3) the component's faulty. ANYTHING but the possibility that LYING RBG is wrong! At least now we know for sure you are a LIAR!
No dataNo witnesses.
= No test done.
I rest my case.
R. BassNut "Perry Mason" Greene
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
As I told everyone numerous times there can NEVER be sufficient proof for RBG. He asked for witnesses & I provided them, he's asked for data in the past & I provided it!'Yet my proof is ALWAYS "alleged" in RBG's eyes. I guess when you can LIE as easily as the Realtime BS Generator does you assume everyone else is as well.
You have no case to rest you ponce, you don't even look at the evidence. Here's the actual facts:
1) You won't accept an previous tests I've done.
2) You won't accept any witnesses I provide.
3) You won't come so I can demonstrate it for you in person.You are just a Lunatic Fringe Objectivist who doesn't want to know the truth, but would rather apppear to be correct, even when you are wrong. I rest me case which at least I can prove.
You say tomayto, I say tomahto.Honest people rarely argue and attack characters as much as you do.
If you have demonstrated positive results with double blind wire tests in front of witnesses (beyond one wire playing louder than another), then you may be the only person in the world with these results.
Sorry, but your attempt to persuade me just was not effective. That doesn't mean you're lying, it just means you have never presented enough evidence (a witness who confirms your skills, the name of someone else who had similar results, or at least test data) to make your claim believable.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG, you LIE in your rants, so you are both! In fact you're also RBG=Realtime BS Generator as well, so you are all 3!FYI Honest people rarely LIE argue and attack characters as much as you do! And you are 100% correct I am not lying. I have in fact, presented YOU enough evidence (members of CFAS as witnesses who confirms my skills, I've given you the name of someone (my friend Rick and Mike) else who had similar results etc. So yes you are LYING, you just refuse to accept what I present, there's HUGE difference between those two things.
My many attempts to persuade you are not effective because you don't want the truth, you want to appear to be correct, even when you are wrong, period!
You also LIE when you tell everyone I DEMAND you come to FLA. I have offered you the hospitality of my home, so you could, if you so choose, witness personally my hearing abilities. Yet you LIE time after time telling people here I DEMAND you come. Please provide one link to any post where I DEMANDED rather than offered for you to come to FLA, LIAR!
Thetubeguy1954
Your ability to hear differences among wires under blind conditions is your opinion.Whether that ability is a fact is open to debate.
If a fact, you would be the ONLY person in the world who has demonstrated to witnesses an ability to differentiate between two wires playing music at the same SPL under double-blind conditions.
Since you would be the only (public) member of this exclusive "WireNut with scientific proof Club", others are entitled to question your claims.At first your claims were ONLY supported by boastful invitations to your home to demonstrate your claimed skills .. with absolutely NO mention of any prior blind test experience, much less positive results during blind tests.
Later you suddenly claimed to have had positive results during blind tests.
But even now, dozens of character attack posts later, you still have never provided ANY relevant blind test details, even such basics as what brand/model wires you compared, whether any A-B volume matching was done or even attempted or even how many A-B trials were done.
In fact, you've provided NO blind experiment design detail at all.
Last, but certainly not least, you've never mentioned the percentage of your A-B trials that had correct answers!
All we reslly know is you make claims about having exceptional hearing ability (the ability to differentiate among wires under blind conditions, when no one else in the world has proven that skill to witnesses) and you later claimed there were witnesses (you never mentioned witnesses in your earliest posts on the subject).
None of these alleged witnesses have ever revealed themselves, nor have your extraordinary hearing ability claims been documented in any audio club newsletter. I would think your claims, if real, would have deserved a front page article in an audio club newletter!
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Or at least SOME proof ...
beyond "I know what I hear".
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Notice how RBG=Realtime BS Generator follows the typical Lunatic Fringe Objectivist warped line of thinking?1) First we have the Realtime BS Generator claiming as if it's a false statement: "So far the best "proof" is TubeNut (that's me) claiming he COULD hear wire differences if he tested himself...".
2) Second we have the Realtime BS Generator claiming I am DEMANDING that he travel across the country to my home! I've never demanded anything. I have offered to provide the PROOF the Realtime BS Generator claims doesn't exist! "IF" RBG wants to know the truth he can come, if he wishes to remain blissfully ignorant, he can and most likely will just continue ranting.
3) Now the Realtime BS Generator states: That's no better "proof" than the typical golden ear boast: "I know what I hear". Which is quite easy to say, seeing as how he refuses to allow the truth and PROOF to be provided for him.
So what do we really have? We have RBG the Realtime BS Generator stating as if it's fact that people CANNOT hear differences in components. Next we have RBG the Realtime BS Generator claiming when I offer to provide PROOF, that I demand he comes to my home. Lastly we have RBG the the Realtime BS Generator stating that's the the same as meerly stating "I know what I hear".
Just like AJinFLA, RBG is Lunatic Fringe Objectivist who doesn't really want to know the truth. He rather LIE and claim he knows no one, can or has heard differences, yet denies every opportuntity presented him to have the PROOF provided as a demand being made on him!
Hopefully you'll see through his BS! But he certainlylives up to his initials huh? RBG = Realtime BS Generator!
Unfortunately, the threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivist bullshit, from RBG.
Or should I skip both as usual?
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG,Once gain you show your marvelous ability to distort the truth of what Subjectivists really believe into your warped Lunatic Fringe Objectivist opinion of what you want others to think they believe.
For example: RBG states, It is the golden ear wackos who claim all components sound different. Yet I don't know one Subjectivist who claims ALL components sound different. Subjectivists claim components sound different and the ONLY way to tell how and to what degree they sound different requires listening to them!
That's a lot different then declaring ALL components sound different! Now RBG I've told you that a few times now, so if you are going to continue LYING and claiming Subjectivists say and believe things they don't, I'll be adding you to my "canned response" answer reserved for the very, very few liars here on A.A. If you don't agree, don't agree. But stick to the facts as they are, not as you want them to be.
If no subjectivist ever says "I can't hear a difference", then that strongy implies all audio components sound different.I've never read a review with "I could not hear a difference" in Stereopile or in Absolute Spound.
Of course since few subjectivists bother matching A-B volumes before comparing two components, there could be audible SPL differences -- however subjectivists rarely, if ever, say "I hear a difference but it's ONLY A playing louder than B".
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Happens all the time--I think you've been informed already. In 40+ years of DIY I not only sometimes do not hear a difference, sometimes I find that the cheaper part/circuit/component sounds better.Even though I saw the faceplates! (Or the price tags.)
Mark,Isn't RBG being so clever? He's never heard it from a Subjectivist? What a surprise what Subjectivist would hang out with this Lunatic Fringe Objectivist?
It no wonder then, is it? He probably doesn't "hear" much from Subjectivists.
. . . I get the impression he would be fun to have a brew with and argue about wires. ;-)Most of my friends (and family, alas) are hopeless idiots politically, yet I still like them. Don't take any of this stuff too seriously; it's only audio!
Meanwhile, give Richard this: when he posts about bass I sit up straight, stop talking with my mouth full, and listen. He's *the man* when it comes to bass.
'Course, that's 'cause he always agrees with me! ;-)
I like listening to music too much to waste time arguing about wires when I could be listening to new music from someone else's collection.I like to hear new music -- whether something I'll want to buy, or even something I'm glad I didn't buy -- as long as it's not too loud.
If a system sounds good, it's probably in a room with good acoustics, and if it sounds bad, it's probably in a room with bad acoustics.
The wires are not going to change bad into good, or good into bad, unless the listener has a very good imagination.Arguing about audio in person is almost as bad as arguing about politics and religion.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Every subjective audiophile knows saying the words "They sound the same to me" out loud ... is grounds for automatic dismissal from the high end audio fantasy world. See Golden Ear Law #1.Golden Ear Law #2 is
"You agree with everything I claim to hear, and I'll agree with everything you claim to hear"
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
is "I won't call you insane for hearing what you think you hear if you won't call me insane for hearing what I think I hear."
Many, many times I've chosen the less expensive or less majestic looking component. Many times I've heard no difference. I'll grant RBG that the magazines never seem to lack for descriptions of differences but I'm unable to share that opinion.Mark, one of my sons has informed me that he's interested in learning the trombone. What should I tell him? :)
RBG,This statement of yours makes absolutly NO SENSE at all! "If no subjectivist ever says "I can't hear a difference", then that strongy implies all audio components sound different."
What that IMHO would strongly imply would be that all audio components sound the same, "IF" no subjectivist ever says "I can't hear a difference" that is. Fortunately I don't no one Subjectivist who says NEVER says "I can't hear a difference", I know sometimes it's possible to not hear a difference but not everytime.
I've never read a review with "I could not hear a difference" in Stereopile or in Absolute Spound. Why would you expect to? Reviewing components that sound a like would be like reviewing components that sound terrible, i.e. no one would want to read about it!
Thetubeguy1954
Okay I told you.Do I get a prize?
With subjectivists comparing two components playing at different volumes there is a good possibility they will hear a slight SPL difference.Subjectivists who don't hear A-B differences usually say they need more time to listen or they'd like to compare the component in their own system or some other excuse -- anything rather than actually saying: "These two components sound the same to me". (as if this possibility is completely impossible in their audio fantasy world),
,
,
,.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
:-)
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA,I noticed you completely ignored by invite! You live fairly close AJinFLA and you make all this claims yet are too afraid to have your opinions disproven! I'm willing to provide proof, if you're so sure I'm wrong come and watch me, but get ready to admit you say me PROVE what I said I could.
Your head is stuck so firmly between the cheeks of your disbelief you're afraid of discovering the REAL TRUTH!
The threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of Objectivist bullshit - TS
Thetubeguy1954
So no, I won't be coming to your house of worship anytime soon. Sorry, I'm agnostic remember? Thanks for the offer though. I don't get to hear tube distortion and low rez uncontrolled directivity speaker box sound very often anymore. Artifical flavoring ain't for me. Just not my bag.
Why don't you order up some brass feet for the Pioneer and some Valhalla cables to "magically" improve the lady's rig? You *know* that stuff works for certain folks.
Better yet, why not swap and put the Monsoons on the Tube heater and the mains speakers on the Pioneer and then report to us how the Tube heater driven Monsoons sound better than the Pioneer driven mains?
That would be a treat. Take care now.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA,No one is asking you to worship ANYTHING! You are extremely vocal in critisizing, berating, calling names & denying Subjectivists claims about tweaks and wires, so I'm offering you an opportunity.
You can witness & participate or make suggestions as different interconnects are placed in my system and I attempt to identify them. This way you'll know exactly what the process was and whether or not I either passed or failed in the process.
Personally I think you are afraid you might be proven incorrect and do NOT want to learn the truth that others such as myself can actually do what you cannot, i.e. identify correctly when different interconnects are placed in a system!
Yet when someone fairly close to you extends you and offer and say, come let me provide the proof you require, you respond with NO! I won't be coming to your house of worship anytime soon. Sorry, I'm agnostic remember? Thanks for the offer though. I don't get to hear tube distortion and low rez uncontrolled directivity speaker box sound very often anymore. Artifical flavoring ain't for me. Just not my bag.
But I question if my system is chock full of tube distortion, uses low rez uncontrolled directivity speaker box sound and artifical flavoring how would I possibly be able to hear the differences in interconnects? I would think you'd jump at the chance of watching me fail.
You remind me of Pat D and RBG now, you're always berating, insulting and criticing Subjectivists claims yet the moment someone offers to provide you PROOF that your opinions are wrong, you come up with a myriad of reasons why you won't come to the place where proof can be provided! You can come up with all the fake excuses you want, but the truth is you're afraid of the truth.
You've lost all credability in my eyes....
You've found your Jesus. Good for you. Could be a worse crutch, like drugs. That would be bad. This audio stuff is harmless (well, except for maybe too much Fluorine). Why not just be happy? Why the overwhelming desire to spread "the truth" to the non-believers?
Do the Audiophile spirits get angry when you do not preach the cable gospel? Am I nut's not to like the euphonic coloration of tubes? Must you convert as many others as you can to satisfy your self doubt?
If you are confident and assured of what you believe is real, not imagined, why do you have to prove anything? The folks who see the image of Mary on the side of a building can't be convinced otherwise, can they? The don't need to prove to anyone that what they believe they see is very real.
Take it easy and lighten up a bit. Maybe bow your head towards valhalla for a minute.
BTW, on the odd chance that you hear a real, not imagined difference, replace or repair that faulty cable or component. That's why they have electronic service centers with measuring equipment, to help folks like you out. (yes, I consider the amps like the ML's you liked, with its deliberately equalized response, to be defective).
Now have you ordered the Threaded Mega Feet for the Pioneer yet?
"improvement in bass, midrange and treble over any of the famous mountings is not subtle"
What more could a person of faith want?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJ, I just have to tell you: You are full of crap! It is YOU who has a strong inflexible belief system. You are just like a hard core atheist who argues in the front of the church. You too, could just leave us alone, but NOOOOOOO!
JC - You are just like a hard core atheist who argues in the front of the churchI've already stated that I don't/would not do that. I have much better things to do with my time. That's exacty why I wouldn't go to TB54's. It is HE who desperately needs me to come to the temple to "Hear the truth".
It's that small bit of self doubt that leads to the need to convert others so that they "believe" as well.
BTW, who is the "us" that I need to leave alone? You speak for everyone here? Do you lead this congregation brother JC?
Voices of dissent not too good for you? Bad news if the flock can think huh? Might lose some "donations" for your products?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA,You have a lot of nerve coming off like I am trying to convert you into purchasing an SET amp or anything else you don't choose to use! You ask Why not just be happy? Why the overwhelming desire to spread "the truth" to the non-believers? You remind me of a child who provokes a dog and when they get bit proclaims I was "only" petting him!
The reality of the situation in case you missed it, is I believe wires influence the sound of an audio system. I prefer tubes to solidstate and I believe "some" of the tweaks being sold work. I also don't personally care if you want to use pro-audio QSC amps, or HK solidstate amps on your DIY speakers. Why should I, I don't have to listen to it, THANK GOD!
So for you question "Why not just be happy?" How can I be happy about a man who responds to my statement of: I can detect when interconnects or speakerwire is changed in my system, with comments about my amp having "euphonic coloration of tubes" or implying my statement is like going see the image of the virgin mary on the side of that building, or I staying up late for Santa, rather than just addressing the comment I made! I find your behavior to be quite offensive, insulting & provoking in nature.
You deliberately provoke me and then when I offer you to come and witness my actually detecting the when interconnects or speakerwire is changed in my system which you feel is akin to see the Virgin Mary or Santa, you decline, go back to your insults & ask me "Why the overwhelming desire to spread "the truth" to the non-believers?" Why? because of your insulting, provokative statements! That's precisely why I offered to demonstrate to YOU my ability to hear what I say I hear.
Yet even after asking me Why not just be happy? You yet again provoke me by stating "BTW, on the odd chance that you hear a real, not imagined difference, replace or repair that faulty cable or component".
So again I say AJinFLA YOU ARE A COWARD, who doesn't want to know the truth. So you can come up with all the fake excuses you want, "euphonic coloration of tubes" I need to replace or repair a faulty cable or component, Mark Levenson amps are defective etc. In the end your just a scared, closed-mined man who's lost all credability in my eyes and I'm sure in many others eyes as well!
The real sad part is you're the only one who suffers for these actions for those ORIONS could sound so much better, with better amps and wires. But you could always borrow Soundminds BSR equalizer and IIRC HK Citation 11 preamp. Then you'd really have an Lunatic Fringe Objectivist dream system!
FYI I haven't ordered the Threaded Mega Feet for the Pioneer yet, because the Pioneer, like your QSC & HK amp, isn't of sufficient quality to merit such an upgrade!
Finally "IF" you really want me to be happy stop acting like a child by insulting me and my equipment (which you've never heard so you have no idea what level of "euphonic coloration of tubes" it does or doesn't have) and actually address the comments I make like an adult would. No one says you have to agree with them, but at least let them be what you comment on. Not all this other crap and then wonder why I respond like I do to you!
The threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of AJinFLA's Lunatic Fringe Objectivist bullshit! -- TS
Thetubeguy1954
TB54 - You have a lot of nerve coming off like I am trying to convert you into purchasing an SET amp or anything else you don't choose to use!Purchasing? See how I quoted you above. Would you mind quoting exactly what I said instead of what I "tried" to say? If you haven't notice, I generally don't mince words.
TB54 - The reality of the situation in case you missed it, is I believe wires influence the sound of an audio system.
Once again, would you please quote me where I said there are no differences in wires or amps? On the contrary, I have said cables and amps *can* be made to sound quite different deliberately (to be sold to those who enjoy colorations) or inadvertently by things like poor speaker or component design.
TB - I prefer tubes to solidstate
Terrific, I prefer solid state to tubes.
TB54 - and I believe "some" of the tweaks being sold work.Ok. So you are only partly illogical. Fractionally irrational. Great. Good job, its a start.
TB54 - I also don't personally care if you want to use pro-audio QSC amps, or HK solidstate amps on your DIY speakers. Why should I, I don't have to listen to it, THANK GOD!
Which one? The wires measure equal but sound different God? The Brass Feet Holy Spirit? The Analog Angels? The Fluoride Fairy? Thank who?
TB54 - So for you question "Why not just be happy?" How can I be happy about a man who responds to my statement of: I can detect when interconnects or speakerwire is changed in my system, with comments about my amp having "euphonic coloration of tubes" or implying my statement is like going see the image of the virgin mary on the side of that building, or I staying up late for Santa, rather than just addressing the comment I made! I find your behavior to be quite offensive, insulting & provoking in nature.
I meant "Why not just be happy" with your *systems sound*. If it pleases you, what the heck does it matter what statements I make. Stop letting self doubt creep in because of what I say.
TB54 - You deliberately provoke me and then when I offer you to come and witness my actually detecting the when interconnects or speakerwire is changed in my system which you feel is akin to see the Virgin Mary or Santa, you decline, go back to your insults & ask me "Why the overwhelming desire to spread "the truth" to the non-believers?" Why? because of your insulting, provokative statements! That's precisely why I offered to demonstrate to YOU my ability to hear what I say I hear.
Now, exactly how were you planning to demonstrate to *me* that *you* are hearing differences? Pray tell.
TB54 - Yet even after asking me Why not just be happy? You yet again provoke me by stating "BTW, on the odd chance that you hear a real, not imagined difference, replace or repair that faulty cable or component".
Provoke? I stand by that advice to anyone.
TB54 - So again I say AJinFLA YOU ARE A COWARD
Well, the truth is that I have a fear of clowns. And carneys. Those people really bother me.
OTOH angry, self doubting religious zealots don't scare me. It's more amusement than fear.TB54 - who doesn't want to know the truth.
Yeah, that's why I stay away from chuch too.
TB54 - So you can come up with all the fake excuses you want, "euphonic coloration of tubes" I need to replace or repair a faulty cable or component, Mark Levenson amps are defective etc. In the end your just a scared, closed-mined man who's lost all credability in my eyes and I'm sure in many others eyes as well!
I don't need excuses to not go to church, go see people bend spoons, go see Mary on a building window, or go sit and "witness" someone believing to hear differences in wires that measure the same. I just don't have time for that crap. I have a happy, fulfilling life. I drink beer and watch football. I chase women. I listen to live music on the weekends. In other words, *better*, more constructive(to me) and enjoyable things to do with my time.
I'd suggest you do the same instead of foaming at the mouth over the enjoyment of *your* music system and proving hearing imagination.TB54 - The real sad part is you're the only one who suffers for these actions for those ORIONS could sound so much better, with better amps and wires. But you could always borrow Soundminds BSR equalizer and IIRC HK Citation 11 preamp. Then you'd really have an Lunatic Fringe Objectivist dream system!
Have you written Linkwitz with these wonderful suggestions? I'm sure he'd love hear such brilliant ideas. Him and that Geddes fellow just can't seem to figure this stuff out themselves. Too ignorant I imagine.
TB54 - FYI I haven't ordered the Threaded Mega Feet for the Pioneer yet, because the Pioneer, like your QSC & HK amp, isn't of sufficient quality to merit such an upgrade!
Shame. It doesn't seem to suggest that prerequisite in the ad.
"The Megas' are ridiculously big and they cost a lot—though much less than exotic rollers, magnetic suspensions or air suspensions. But the improvement in bass, midrange and treble over any of the famous mountings is not subtle."
Perhaps you could write the good Doctor to have this remedied.
I wonder if it's like Voodoo, where it only affects certain minds?TB54 - Finally "IF" you really want me to be happy stop acting like a child by insulting me and my equipment (which you've never heard so you have no idea what level of "euphonic coloration of tubes" it does or doesn't have) and actually address the comments I make like an adult would. No one says you have to agree with them, but at least let them be what you comment on. Not all this other crap and then wonder why I respond like I do to you!
I do want you to be happy. Take a few, slow deep breaths. I can't imagine how someone so sure of how good their rig sounds could be so insulted by mere words. My words can't change the sound right? Are you starting to wonder just slightly what a powerful, dynamic driver open baffle speaker might do to your system instead of Norse God wires, brass feet and other such rubbish? I don't :-).
TB54 - The threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of AJinFLA's Lunatic Fringe Objectivist bullshit! -- TS
Thetubeguy1954
You're no Softky. That's for sure :-).
cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA you state so innocently I can't imagine how someone so sure of how good their rig sounds could be so insulted by mere words. My words can't change the sound right?To which I respond you are correct for once, you cannot (THANK GOD) change the sound of my system with your words. However you can and deliberately do provoke me with your words! You see AJinFLA instead of reading my post and responding with why you disagree with MY OPINIONS, like a rational, intelligent person would, you prefer to embellish your responses with insults of me and my equipment.
So allow me to ask you a question AJinFLA. Why can't you act like an adult & simply respond to what I post and state why you disagree with it, like I can assure you, you would were we face to face? Why do you feel the need to constantly insult me or my equipment? What would be the purpose of such actions except to provoke me?
Your behaviour is exactly like that of a child who torments a dog and then runs home crying after he gets bit and claims "I was only petting the dog!"
Seeing as we both live fairly close in FL and your actions serve no purpose except to provoke me, why not meet me face-to face? That way you can provoke me realtime & not when not protected by the anonymity of a moniker on a computer! Me, thetubeguy1954? I'm Tom Scata in Orlando, Fl. Who are you AJinFla? I believe you are the coward I said you were when I offered to PROVIDE PROOF that different wires can be detected by myself.
Now I'm also willing to provide you proof that your insults are something you'd only do protected by the anonymity of a moniker on a computer! Of course I'm sure you'll decline to be shown this proof as well.
Take it easy old man before you have a stroke or something LOL. Calm yourself, maybe go listen to the soothing sound of your stereo?
Look, there is nothing wrong with having the condition you have. But it may be best to go seek some professional help for your delusions and anger all at once. That stuff can't be healthy for you.
Start with the anger part and then maybe slowly work away the over imagination stuff.
There are trained experts who can help with those who both see and/or hear ghosts and voices, etc.
Get help before it's not too late man, you need it. Sincerely. You'll be a happier man and audiophile for it. Take care.
cheers,AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
AJinFLA,Still feeling brave hiding behind your keyboard? Still choosing to provoke me with words and insults, i.e. "go seek some professional help for your delusions and anger all at once."
Go ahead AJinFLA keep prodding the pitbull with the stick, but when the day arrives that the dog gets off the chain and happens to find you, don't go running home crying "I was only petting the dog!"
As I said before we both live fairly close in FL and your actions serve no purpose except to provoke me, so why not meet me face-to face? That way you can provoke me realtime & not when not protected by the anonymity of a moniker on a computer! I told you before I am Tom Scata aka thetubeguy1954 in Orlando, Fl. Who and where are you AJinFla?
When the day comes and you change from a taunting little girl to a man with the balls large enough to say to my face what you'll say when protected by the anonymity of a moniker on a computer, call me! FYI my blood pressure is fine. I happen to believe that REAL MEN won't say anything about a person they wouldn't say directly to that person's face. I was assuming, perhaps mistakenly you were a REAL MAN and wanted to offer you the possibility! But as I said before we live fairly close. I also know members of the neighboring Space Coast Audio Society. I'll just wait till the day comes when someone in one of these groups or an audio salon talks about this local guy using ORION speakers powered by QSC amps : ^)
I know there aren't to many people around with that combo and the intials AJ.Good Luck!
Any chance you would have what it takes to Google "transactional analysis", have a good read and start to gain some insight into what happens here repeatedly in such threads.In shorthand: (YOU means everyone in this situation, not just TTG)
No-one is responsible for your anger, feelings or hurts except YOU.
Others may say things which result in you feeling angry. They did not MAKE you angry (hurt, ashamed, etc), you allowed it to.
we are all responsible for how WE feel, act and respond. As adults.
Probably a waste of time, but ..............
Clifff,You are correct! That in itself is an amazing thing YOU can mean you-all(usteds in spanish) or you-personal(tu) However being an American citizen, born & raised, I do speak english and know when the word you is being used either way and it's not always refering to everyone in this situation. I don't know why you'd even bring that up, but oh well.
How typical of you to feel the need to insult me with these comments:
1)Any chance you would have what it takes to Google "transactional analysis"
2)Probably a waste of time, but ..............Rather than just make your point! It's about what I expect from a limey, plonker like yourself! I guess if those words bother you Cliffff, no-one is responsible for your anger, feelings or hurts except YOU. You ignorant POS.
Any idiot knows that no-one is responsible for your anger, feelings or hurts except yourself. I agree when others say things which result in you feeling angry. They did not MAKE you angry (hurt, ashamed, etc), you allowed it to. Afterall we are all responsible for how WE feel, act and respond. As adults.
But if you took your British head out of your as* you'd also realize that when someone informs you your actions are insulting & offensive to them. Then as an adult who's responsible for how they act & respond, to continue such deliberate acts of provocation with this person makes YOU responsible for: 1) how YOU acted as an adult and 2) how others response to YOUR offensive actions as an adult!
For Example: As an adult if someone walked into an area where many African-Americans were standing and shouted out the N-Word, wouldn't you feel after this person got their as* kicked, that as an adult they were: 1) responsible for how THEY acted as an adult and 2) how the others responsed to THEIR deliberate offensive act? I know I wouldn't feel sorry for that fool, not one bit!
As I've said numerous times here. People can disagree with all my opinions if they so choose. But disagreeing with my opinions doesn't entitle them to a FREE PASS at insulting me and my choices in life. The funny part is we never know what is going to insult who (that's why I tell others when I find their actions insulting.) For Example: I am Sicilian. You can call me WOP, Guinea, Grease-Ball, etc, I don't take offense at all by these names, many of my cousins would react the way African-Americans do to the N-Word.
Sorry to disagree with your line-of-thinking here, but as adults I believe we are responsible for the words we speak to others. We are even MORE responsible as adults when we know the other person finds our words hurtful or insulting. I'll grant you that we are also responsible as adults for the power we give others words, but you have to admit that had the man in the scenerio above never said the N-Word, he would have never gotten his as* kicked either. So I believe ultimately the responsibilty lies with person speaking the words.
I apologize for calling you a limey, plonker I was attempting to show you how words can be deliberatly offensive. Maybe you're like me or maybe like my cousins, I won't know until you tell me. I'm trying to really educate you in this matter, but it is probably a great waste of time, still I tried..............
Amongst all the other insults.Very sad, TG, very sad.
Do try and do something about the anger and invective. It is VERY unhealthy for you.
Clifff I told you the insults were done just to show you how deliberately provoking with words has some power even if we wished it didn't!That's whats being done to me and you told "get over it" in so many words, so why do my insults bother you?
Most of his allegations against other people are just projections of his own faults on to others.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
T
TG54,Do you realize that by displaying such anger and animosity over mere words typed on a computer screen, you are proving exactly what I have been saying? I say that subjectivism is illogic and irrationality and you say no, no, no and then do what? Did you understand that I knew precisely how an illogical and irrational person would react when I typed what I did? (You know the jihadists and the inquisitionists couldn't/can't think rationally either)
The lashing out at folks like me or any of the other objectivists merely serves to prove a point. Calm yourself and think for a moment. If you can.
I'll bet that they offer a logic class at your local university (it was part of the curriculum when I was in Electrical Engineering college and I'm sure it still is). Try enrolling in at least that, if not some of the actual Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry and other core classes so that you can start to come to grips with reality and begin to realize why all of this imaginary stuff looks so foolish (A psychology class might also be useful).
I think it really may help with your anger and possibly ease some of the anguish and doubt about why things sound the way they do. It's never too late.
cheers,AJ
BTW, I keep telling you my speakers are not Orions, although they certainly share that platform. If I ever get over to the Space Coast, I will be sure to invite you to come hear what a real stereo sounds like, with distortion intentionally removed from every facet of the system, from the drivers back to the source, with nary a magicians prop like brass feet or deity wires, etc.
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Well if they're not Orions how do I know they are any good? I've only heard 2 DIY speakers that didn't stink like a skunks behind.As far as anger, I haven't threatened you. I am only offering you the opportunity to be a MAN, and not some opinionanted SOB hiding behind the moniker of his PC. I find you a very offensive person, who apparently cannot discuss or debate intelligently with someone who doesn't share your POV. Instead you insult them and their choices in life.
I've told you, people who behave like you are the kind that tortures animals, but be careful, because every now and then the animal bites back! I'm trying to help you, not hurt you.
Keep up the good work TG54, the more stuff like that you elicit from THEM (The High-End Maladroits), the easier it becomes to see their abandonment of reason and collegiality, their yielding to testy temper tantrums.
Clark,Even more ridiculous was AJinFLA supposed "defense" of: "Am I nut's not to like the euphonic coloration of tubes?" Who said AJinFLA had to like how my system sounded? The invite was to prove I could hear differences in interconnects and speakerwire. One doesn't need to like how my system sounds or be "converted" to tubes in order to witness a test!
You would think AJinFLA would jump at the chance to disprove me and be able to post that information here. In fact I would think it would be rather difficult for me to detect the differences in interconnects and speakerwire due to "euphonic coloration of tubes" distorting the signal in my system, "IF" AJinFLA is correct in his assessment of it!
AJinFLA through many insults and provocations wants to be able to spout his Lunatic Fringe Objectivists religous beliefs that interconnects and speakerwire sound the same. Yet we Subjectivists cannot respond without be told to calm down. I wonder why AJinFLA cannot just be happy? Why does AJinFLA have the overwhelming desire to spread "his truth" to us non-believing Subjectivists?
Of course like the rest of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists here on AA, AJinFLA always carries his Official Objectivist Trump Card, i.e. if the differences heard are real and not imagined, there's a faulty cable or component that needs to be replaced or repaired (I guess being able to divine these things WITHOUT testing is a part of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists religions faith.)
Of course I think AJinFLA's comment about the Mark Levenson ML-2 power amps "...(yes, I consider the amps like the ML's you liked, with its deliberately equalized response, to be defective)." While owning and using QSC & Harmon Kardon solidstate power amps as references is perhaps the best insight into his actual poor hearing acuity and lack of familiarity with live music.
The threshold for proving something is higher than the threshold for denying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of AJinFLA's Lunatic Fringe Objectivist bullshit - TS
ML-2 amps are equalized? Since, I had something to do with that design, I would like to know what Mark changed to 'equalize' them. I might learn something new, here. ;-)
Go for it John, I'm dying to see if he listened or tested the ML-2s.
His character type is to sit at the keyboard and pound out insults, rather than collegially and congenially visit with us, in person or otherwise.
We already know that AJinFLA is afraid that he might be converted! It's so much easier to berate, insult, mislead & critic like AJinFLA does, than it is to actually have something proven to him.AJinFLA's makes the ridiculous equation that hearing differences in wires is the equal of waiting up for Santa or seeing the Virgin Mary in a piece of glass. Perhaps his even more ludicrous defense of: "Am I nut's not to like the euphonic coloration of tubes?" Is seen as an assinine statement to make considering he's never heard my system, so how does he know whether there is or isn't euphonic coloration of tubes present?
I'd also like to know how disliking the sound of my system prevents him from witnessing whether or not I can detect when different interconnects or speakerwire are in my system? Hopefully the real truth that AJinFLA doesn't want to know if I can actually detect when different interconnects or speakerwire are in my system is plain for all to see!
AJinFLA just wants to argue & espouse his Lunatic Fringe Objectivist statements than discover the real truth about whether or not I can detect when different interconnects or speakerwire are in my system. Otherwise if AJinFLA did come over and I PROVED I can detect when different interconnects or speakerwire are in my system he'd have nothing to write about on A.A. anymore. That's probably what he's most afraid of most! It would kill him not to be able to insult and berate us Subjectivists. Afterall look at his posts, AJinFLA spend more time insulting a persons beliefs and berating their components than he does responding to their actual comments.
To be honest I don't think AJinFLA cares one way or the other. He prefers being a troll who starts the flames...
Are they all so afraid of having their beliefs tested? When the proof is right in front of their noses, do they all turn a blind eye towards it? Do they all spend a lot of time not only espousing their own beliefs but putting down those of dissenters without bothering to try and understand the other side? When someone offers to (attempt to) show them they are wrong, do they all run away? Do they all talk the talk about needing proof but can't walk the walk? Do they all do this? Or is it just you?You make a lot of funny comments on this board. That's great. Funny people are fun to be around. I'm just wondering if we should take you seriously and, if you truly represent Objectivists, if we should take THEM seriously. Just asking. Tubeguy has offered to expand your learning and your experience and perhaps put your strong beliefs to the test. He could do it himself but who would believe him? Or maybe the objectivist POV is simply to argue religion, and proof against their religion would spoil the fun. I ask again - do we simply view you as a comedian or do we ever take you seriously?
Perhaps it's the rampant imagination of subjectivists that cause them to read what is not written much like hearing what they want to hear. Unless you can quote where I claimed to represent anyone or everyone else.
Kerr? My quote?Why do subjectivist run way from ABX tests when there are "Not subtle" differences in wires, stones, brass, etc? Are they all cowards? Is it because of the humiliation of all such previous tests, of which there are a GREAT many?
Why do weak minds falter under such simple tests? Where do all those very, very clear differences disappear to? The exits, like all the subjectivists?
I can tell the difference between my speakers and TB54's, blindfolded, standing on a plank above a pool of sharks. Yet you can't hear the difference between wires sitting in an easy chair doing an ABX.
Gee, I wonder why this is LOL.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
> Perhaps it's the rampant imagination of subjectivists that cause them to read what is not written much like hearing what they want to hear. <Touche for objectivists... oops, I mean you!
> Unless you can quote where I claimed to represent anyone or everyone else. <
I cannot - which is why I "asked" you if you represented them.
> Why do subjectivist run way from ABX tests when there are "Not subtle" differences in wires, stones, brass, etc? <
I don't know. I've performed several.
> Yet you can't hear the difference between wires sitting in an easy chair doing an ABX. <
Who says I can't? Who says Tubeguy can't? Only those who won't allow him to present firsthand proof. Nice, safe assumption, AJ. You're obviously enamored of it since you're holding onto it so tightly. Enjoy.
c
I'd like to know who is willing to stop by Tubeguy's house for some proof the next time they're in Florida and who's all bluster.
z
Kerr,Probably the 3 biggest and loudest critics of wires here are AJinFLA, RBG, Pat D (although Pat D will claim he doesn't believe ALL wires sound the same, he'll deny anyone can detect 3ft interconnects and/or 8ft speakerwire, which is essentially ALL wires for audiophiles, "IF" the components are functioning properly.)
To this Objectivist Lunatic Fringe you're a wire wacko, or in the same boat with those who still believe in Santa or the Virgin Mary appearing on building sides, if you state that wires are critical components of an audio system.
I've offered to Pat D, RBG and AJinFLA to provide proof I can detect differences in wires in my system. Why my system? Because I am intimately familar with it! I can understand Pat D and RBG not wanting to come to Florida just to witness this, but AJinFLA actually lives fairly close to me. Yet when I make the same offer to AJinFLA he responds with comments like:
1) Why not just be happy?
2) Why the overwhelming desire to spread "the truth" to the non-believers?
3) Must you convert as many others as you can to satisfy your self doubt?
4) If you are confident and assured of what you believe is real, not imagined, why do you have to prove anything? The folks who see the image of Mary on the side of a building can't be convinced otherwise, can they?
5) BTW, on the odd chance that you hear a real, not imagined difference, replace or repair that faulty cable or component.So YES Kerr the Objectivist Lunatic Fringe of which these three are charter members, but NOT all Objectivists, will continue to rant, argue, insult and provoke, those who believe wires are critical components. But the moment they're directly challenged they come up with a myriad of reasons why they don't want to witness the PROOF that can be provided! At least now people are starting to see these Lunatic Fringe Objectivists for what they truly are.
Thetubeguy1954
> But the moment they're directly challenged they come up with a myriad of reasons why they don't want to witness the PROOF that can be provided! <I find that disconcerting, to say the least! From practically the time that I did my very first upgrade of a non-speaker audio component, I've heard screams for proof of cables, amps, preamps, CDP's, etc - that one sounded different from another. I felt no need to provide such proof because I did not care if anyone believed me. But I truly believed that they actually wanted the proof they were screaming for, and weren't just screaming just to be argumentative. I guess I was wrong about that. If you had performed DBT's on your own gear and passed, not one objectivist would likely be convinced. But you, sir, offered to prove to not only witnesses but the very objectivists that doubt you that you can hear these differences. I can't imagine what else you could be expected to do.
And if I didn't live so far away, I'd bring the feedbag and the cooler down to your place, just to hear your system, had you offered. And I don't even NEED proof! :)
Kerr,If you are ever visiting Orlando, Fla. send me an email and we'll make arrangements for you to hear the system! : ^)
...was this a spoof on the old "Northeast Airlines" ads from the '60s where a guy named "Jim Dooley" would say "Come on down on Northeast Airlines"?. I remember freezing my ass off in Philly, seeing that guy in Florida saying that. Pretty effective ad.
Good catch Andy_C. It was both, a spoof on the ad and a genuine invite.
You're a prince among men! Not sure when I'll be in Orlando but I'll be sure to look you up.I'd also like to comment that you certainly have struck an interesting topic here. I've learned a little about the objectivist POV and my eyes have been opened a bit. I'm not sure I'm really interested in arguing the topic of cable/amp sonics anymore as it seems to be one of those things that will never get resolved. I had hope for awhile but I guess it really doesn't matter as long as we are all getting what we need from our systems. Thanks for standing firm on your offer to prove what subjectivists have known for decades.
Kerr,You are absolutely 100% correct. Arguing the topic of cable/amp sonics will never get resolved. As Objectivists believe there's no audible difference and Subjectvists believe there are audible differences, I don't see why RBG, AJinFLA and sometimes Pat D need to constantly critisize us. Why not just allow us Subjectvists to believe what we believe as the Objectivists believe what they want to believe?
When I state I hear differences in interconnects and speakerwire I am NOT claiming every can or needs to. I'm only declaring what I know to be 100% truth, I can, period! However the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists here won't even allow me to make the statement, without berating my equipment and insulting me. If you watch you'll see it's them who won't allow, live and let live, not me.
d
T
Unproven claims of having extraordinary hearing ability are easy to make but not so easy to prove.Claiming you CAN prove your own claims any time you want to, as you often do, is not a logical defense of those claims.
Where are any witnesses who have ALREADY seen you prove your own extraordinary hearing ability claims?
Are they afraid to speak up fearing that Objectivists will send
hit men to silence them?
.
.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG,Your posts are getting to be the stuff of fairy tales! You are definitely the king of the Objectivist Lunatic Fringe.
You make highly negative opinionated statements such as, unproven claims of having extraordinary hearing ability are easy to make but not so easy to prove, as if they are facts! The reality is only YOU, RBG are making the claim that Subjectivists have extraordinary hearing abilities, not us!
I don't know any Subjectivist who claims they have extraordinary hearing abilities . What I and the Subjectivists I know actually claim is we have developed through training & experience well-trained ears. Doing that has allowed us to know what to make of what we hear, & how to interpret it . That's a a BIG difference, than claiming we have extraordinary hearing abilities, as you intentionally, misleadingly & falsely state we believe.
Even your audio idol Peter Aczel admits "The Golden Ears want you to believe that their hearing is so keen, so exquisite, that they can hear tiny nuances of reproduced sound too elusive for the rest of us. Absolutely not true. ANYONE (emphasis added) without actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but only those with training and experience know what to make of it, (and) how to interpret it. "
Now your statement: Claiming I CAN prove my own claims any time I want to, as I often do, is not a logical defense of those claims. Why not? Because you say so? I'm stating a fact. A fact that IMHO is a lot more logical, in the light of your fellow Objectivist Peter Aczel admitting ANYONE without actual hearing impairment can hear what I hear! The reality is it's YOU who appears foolish for denying I can hear what I say. If you only took the required time with training and experience to know what to make of it (it = the differences heard)& how to interpret it, you'd admit to hearing them like I do & Peter Aczel says ANYONE can.
The problem is unfortunately you & many of your fellow Lunatic Fringe Objectivists here on A.A. are so biased (remember how biases influnce us?) against believing there are differences to be heard you cannot, have not & will not take the time to develope through training & experience, well-trained ears. That alone automatically prevents you from having the training and experience know what to make of the differences heard & how to interpret them! Sadly because you haven't trained your ears you don't hear what you could if you did. Now because you don't hear it, you insist it isn't there to be heard! You are definitely on the Objectivist Lunatic Fringe RBG, not even Peter Aczel agrees with what you are claiming here!
As far as where are any witnesses who have ALREADY seen me prove my what I, Peter Aczel & every Subjectivist I know calls well-trained ears, yet YOU mistakenly call " extraordinary hearing ability " claims? Ask anyone in the Central Florida Audio Society, please be my guest or come and see for yourself.
Finally RBG you end this highly misleading rant with this statement: Are they afraid to speak up fearing that Objectivists will send hit men to silence them? How can anyone respond to your intelligently to your highly negativly-opinionated & misleading statement that I or any other Subjectivist has " extraordinary hearing ability " when the reality is:
1)It's something you madeup and no Subjectivist claims?
2)Your audio idol Peter Aczel admits it's NOT true?
3)You won't accept the word of fellow members of CFAS?No matter what I say or do you'll find an excuse why it doesn't prove anything. So I ask what are you afraid of, why not allow me to prove to you personally what I say and even Peter Aczel believes is true?
...when no audiophile ever tested over three decades could demonstrate similar skills under controlled listeing conditions."Extraordinary" means an unproven claim of exceptional hearing ability, as in many of your posts.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Stu
T
.
At least one person here got your joke. :-)
(paraphrasing here) that some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them. ;-)
About Progold Spray , he writes naively :
Every six months, I spray ProGold on every connector in my studio. I always hear a satisfying sonic improvement—less smearing of instrumental timbres while quiet instruments stand out clearly from their background.Which leads to two exclusive possibilities:
- He doesn't care about the customers of his studio : what about the poor band who makes at Sprey's studio a record they pay to get the best possible, and who has the bad luck to do it 5 months and an half after the last time Sprey sprayed his Progold Spray?
Using Sprey's wording and logical deduction of his own discourse, they poor chaps will get more smearing of instrumental timbres while quiet instruments won't stand out clearly from their background
Poor bands...- He cares about the customers of his studio , and its sound quality is constant along time, would he wet his connectors with Progold Spray or not.
In this case, he lies flatly in his ad: no less or more smearing of instrumental timbres while quiet instruments stand out clearly blah blah : he just don't respect the would-be customers of his products by taking them for idiots.Since elsewhere, he states Our recording technology is equally radical. We design and build, or custom-modify, all of our electronics from microphones to tape recorders to wires. All must meet standards well beyond commercial state-of-the-art. , one can think he does care about his studio's customers.
On another side, the sonic quality of many of his records is recognized.
The conclusion is yours.
BTW: Which is not to say I take contact cleaners as snake oil, I don't. I use them (although industrial ones which are much less expensive than "special audio" whose only special feature is their astronomic pricing). Not to get "less smearing", but to give connectors a longer life by minimizing shear when pluging them in or out.
Not only audio equipment, but video, lab instrumentation, etc.
Jacques, Pro-Gold is made by Caig, a LONG ESTABLISHED manufacturer of electronic cleaners and preservers. They obviously saw a market in audio, so they formulated something, with their experience, that works well with typical audio contacts. Most of these contact preservatives have some microcrystaline grease to keep the air out of the spaces between where the contacts actually connect. Pro gold is no more expensive in Caig's range as Cramolin Red or Blue was when it was offered to the public, before they had to change the formulation to comply with new regulations. I still use Cramolin Red on any dirty contact, and if it really is visually compromised, I use Caig DeoxIT D5, in a spray can. I suspect that Cramolin Blue is related to Pro Gold, which I tend not to use, because I have found that microcrystaline greases contained in Pro Gold or Cramolin Blue, or Stablant 22, for that matter, can 'compromise' really clean thick 'gold on gold' surfaces, like on the RCA connectors that I typically use. There, using a diluted solution of Cramolin Red mixed with industrial grade isopropyl alcohol, works to remove any grease deposisted from handling or from the environment, without leaving much of a film.
In truth, I hope that many here now better understand what pro hi end people do to make their contacts as ideal as possible. This is normal in serious hi end recording and practice.
The cleaner I use is F2 contacts, made by KF, a local french subsidiary of CRC Industries.Cleaners today are much better than those built 10 or 15 years ago. Maybe the fact that freon solvants and propellants are phased out boosted the research. Good for us users.
At the beginning of the '90s, I had problems with them in airtight LRM (modules) for submarines: the layer of oil deposited onto the contacts was soon decoming very viscous and non-newtonian, and after a while (some months), ecah time the LRM was plugged/unplugged, a thicker and thicker layer of goo was accumulating after having been displaced ny the incoming contact...
Until the goo spread until able to slip under a contact the next time you unplugged it...
It was shown that the culprit was the glue used to bind together in each LRM its two half-boards sandwiched with the thermal Copper/Invar/Copper board... It emitted vapors that dissolved and reacted onto/with the cleaner's oil layer... Mammama...No, these problems are gone, and the cleaners' oil layers don't ever anymore attract aerial dust.
CRC is OK, BUT you should try some Cramolin Red from Germany. Not the USA..
I own over one dozen Mapleshade and Wildchild CDsThe performances are not good enough -- they usually just collect dust.
The Midnite reggae CD is the one exception -- it is the best sounding reggae I've ever heard (I have Marley's Mobile Fidelity CDs too) and the performances are decent (good, not excellent).
Some of the "free tweaks" in the catalog are so bizzare they even make YOUR audio claims seem reasonable!
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
Without hearing them they remind me of the CIMP label CD's-great recordings with two mic's, live in studio, no overdubs of very wierd jazz stuff. I like jazz a lot but these are so avantgard they make avant Gard sound like Kenny G.
> Without hearing them they remind me of the CIMP label CD's-great recordings with two mic's, live in studio, no overdubs of very wierd jazz stuff. I like jazz a lot but these are so avantgard they make avant Gard sound like Kenny G. <Not all of them. There's a very nice solo piano Charles Eubanks disc and the discs with vocalists on them are very straight ahead with the exception of the Mary LaRose disc. I'd say about 10-15% of CIMP's discs are pretty mainstream.
I agree. While Mapleshade can cover the entire range of jazz, many of their titles are straight ahead (and quite good).
...for his wires and tweaks are so "over the top" that he adds to the rift between subjectivist and objectivist rather than seeking to bridge it. I see few manufacturers using the kind of hyperbole used by Pierre. It makes him seem ridiculous.Now that does not mean his wires and tweaks can't be beneficial but the problem we subjectivists run into is the old "night and day" differences between components. To most people, that means 180 degrees difference and I can't believe ANYONE actually feels that way unless they're comparing Bose Accoustimass with Wilson MAXX.
That said, I agree with Pat D and Richard Greene - they are great sounding recordings. Now if I could just find some that I actually wanted to listen to! I will say that, being an "out" jazz nut that the Raphe Malik is excellent. He used his current (at the time) quintet and played the same fare he would have used for Boxholder or any other label. I believe that was Mapleshade's first recording. There are a few other decent CD's but nothing earthshattering.
Pierre Sprey is a highly-degreed (PhD. x 2) mathematician and systems analyst whose words on certain military high-tech items are accepted more-or-less as gospel. He's even been profiled in the Washington Post (see URL). Why then should his discoveries in audio ( mere audio) be dismissed so blithely because they fail to bridge some sort of gap?If Pierre is confident of his findings (he is!) and proud of them as well (ditto!) hasn't he every right to assert their effectiveness? Anyway who said the "objectivists" have a leg to stand on here, face to face with a highly-trained scientist like Pierre Sprey? From the article:
He left the Pentagon in 1986, he said, because "it became increasingly obvious that the atmosphere at the Pentagon was such that it would be impossible to build another honest aircraft."
His position on audio would be that, given the howls of outrage that greet his "tweaky" procedures and products, that it's impossible for commercial purveyors to build an honest audio system.
clark
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/15/AR2006051501518.html?nav=rss_print/asection (Open in New Window)
In particular, I long used the Omega Mikro speaker wires and power cords but not any longer. I am not sure whether the recording are made with the top-of-the-line Omega Mikros are the less expensive Mapleshade wires.Anyone who has ever compared the sound of the red OM power cords with the opposite direction wire pulled blue OM power cords will have to accept that they sound quite different.
The other Mapleshade products, however, leave me cold. I tried the maple bases and hated them. I tried their brass tiptoes versus those by Lloyd Walker and preferred the Valid Points. Today, however, I use neither.
I tried the Mapleshade interconnects in a bag and the twisted twin lead speaker wires and found them just okay.
I guess the real answer to your question is to ask whether the recording are made with the wires and other tweaks sold by Mapleshade and whether other components such as PZM mikes, recording machines, and the recording venue make the difference. I don't see any real contradiction in liking the recordings and not the other products.
c
- "Anyone who has ever compared the sound of the red OM power cords with the opposite direction wire pulled blue OM power cords will have to accept that they sound quite different."I do accept this brother. But, I prefer the non-directional black OM myself. The red OM has an edgy, angry sound to it, the blue OM is sort of laid back and cool, but the black...well, it just has no coloration whatsoever.
cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
> The red OM has an edgy, angry sound to it, the blue OM is sort of laid back and cool, but the black...well, it just has no coloration whatsoever. <...but this is damn funny! LOL! Reminds me of the one where the guy placed a dictionary under his CDP to improve its definition. :)
Hey, if you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at? DON'T ANSWER THAT!!!!
Pierre Sprey is a highly-degreed (PhD. x 2) mathematician and systems analyst whose words on certain military high-tech items are accepted more-or-less as gospel. He's even been profiled in the Washington Post (see URL). Why then should his discoveries in audio (mere audio) be dismissed so blithely because they fail to bridge some sort of gap?
So they should be accepted just as blithely because he has a couple of PhDs and a profile in the Washington Post?
This is a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority.
I find it interesting that Sprey's PhDs in mathematics get played up here as testament to support his claims, but when others with PhDs in physics and the like say things that don't support your beliefs, their PhDs seem to carry no weight at all.
se
...when they don't want to see 'em they dismiss 'em.The point I clearly made, which you ignore, is that Sprey has all the needed qualifications of an "objectivist"; these are dismissed by such as yourself only because you disagree with his findings. How objective is that ?
...who lacked ANY of the qualifications needed to be a subjectivist.> > > The point I clearly made, which you ignore, is that Sprey has all the needed qualifications of an "objectivist" < < <
Now you may not think that listening is important... but if you want to specify that lack as a qualification for an objectivist, be my guest.
We test our hearing ability to be confident differences are really audible. If they are, we feel qualified to voice subjective opinions just like any subjective audiophile.Subjective audiophiles just assume they would pass this hearing test.
Objective audiophiles prove they know what they hear while subjective audiophiles merely assume they "know what they hear".
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG you are so Lunatic Fringe Objectivist even your audio idol Peter Aczel doesn't agree with you!Peter Aczel admits "The Golden Ears want you to believe that their hearing is so keen, so exquisite, that they can hear tiny nuances of reproduced sound too elusive for the rest of us. Absolutely not true. ANYONE (emphasis added) without actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but only those with training and experience know what to make of it, (and) how to interpret it."
Surely you jest! That actually makes sense! Aczel is so far removed from reality that I can't believe he came back to earth long enough to figure this out. Wow! That's one helluva find, Tubeguy! Are you sure he didn't finish with something like "...but as we all know, there's nothing to hear anyway and anyone who says otherwise is a mouth-breathing, drooling imbecile"?
Yes Kerr Peter Aczel admitted that! It was actually something he said quite awhile back. I believe I found the quote when the Audio Critic was free.Personally I could never understand how Peter could say that and deny amps, preamps, wires etc sound different!
> Personally I could never understand how Peter could say that and deny amps, preamps, wires etc sound different! <He used to be able to hear differences but I think he's running a crusade against the audiophile community and press for ostracizing him over the Fourier speaker fiasco. But it was an interesting quote because it is clearly from his objectivist era based on his derisive use of the term "golden ears", yet it shows an amazing degree of intelligence that I didn't know he possessed. Thanks for digging this up.
As I have pointed out before, Tom has a habit of quoting people with a reference. In fact, the quotation can be found in Aczel's article, "The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio," under No. 10, "The Golden Ear Lie," and I'm pretty sure you have read it--but apparently didn't understand all of it. The point made is fairly basic to Aczel's point of view.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
After reading the article again and in context, I retract my comment that Aczel showed intelligence with that comment. Thanks for clearing that up.
.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
...that this is a bad thing? ;-)FWIW, I'm a "know what I hear" kinda guy, but I also allow that I'm not going to be infallible in all of my assessments. I don't consider that to be within the realm of terrestrial possibility. I can tell you unequivocally that my assessments, taken as a whole, have produced stunningly good results as implemented. How do I know this you might ask? Because I know what I hear of course.
> I also allow that I'm not going to be infallible in all of my assessments. <You would also not be infallible if you DBT'd everything. I'm a "know what I hear" person as well... once I spend a fair amount of time listening critically on each component. I'm with you - I'll take false positives over false negatives. Perhaps I've spent a few too many dollars for good sound but that's better than spending too few, IMHO.
a
The point I clearly made, which you ignore, is that Sprey has all the needed qualifications of an "objectivist"
Mmmm. I wasn't aware that PhDs and profiles in newspapers were any sort of needed qualification for an "objectivist." Where is that rule written?
these are dismissed by such as yourself only because you disagree with his findings. How objective is that?
First, I don't recall having said anything about his findings one way or the other. Care to provide a quote from me to back that up or will you be withdrawing that claim?
Second, I have said many times over the years that one's words don't stand or fall based on the "credentials" of those who say them, but on the veracity of what is actually said. And that applies to both those I may agree with as well as those I may disagree with.
If you have any evidence to the contrary, let's see it.
se
And no, I'm not inviting Jim to drop a brick on my head.Just noting Clark's silence since being asked to support the statements he'd made against me.
se
> > And no, I'm not inviting Jim to drop a brick on my head. < <:-)
:-)
Didn't think I was ever going to let you live that one down, did ya? :)
se
> > Didn't think I was ever going to let you live that one down, did ya? :) < <
Some of his claims even make YOU seem reasonable.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
RBG,I have no problems with you disagreeing with me or what most other Subjectivists believe. I expect that of an Objectivist. What disappoints me about your approach is you intentionally mis-lead others with your misrepresentations of what I and other Subjectivists are actually saying we believe. Rather than honestly address what we say you distort it as much as possible and then call the claim wacko.
For example, you state that Subjectivists claim to have extraordinary hearing abilities. When the truth is all Subjectivists claim is we have developed through training & experience well-trained ears. Doing that has allowed us to know what to make of what we hear, & how to interpret it. That's a a BIG difference, than claiming we have extraordinary hearing abilities, as you intentionally, misleadingly & falsely state we believe! Even your fellow Objectivist Peter Aczel agrees with that Subjectivist claim, for Peter admits "...ANYONE (emphasis added) without actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but only those with training and experience know what to make of it, (and) how to interpret it."
Or you'll state TubeGuy sez:"WIRES ARE A COMPONENT JUST AS CRITICAL AS SPEAKERS " = Tube Guy is a certified audio wacko! Once again misleading others into believing I'm stating that the differences in wires is as great as the major differences in sound between completely different speakers technologies like a Quad ESL and say an AR9. While I believe that it "possible" that changes that great can be achieved in wires, the reality is more in line with my belief that if we took 10 $5K dynamic speakers, the changes in different speaker wires or interconnects could be more dramatic than the change of sound in different $5K dynamic speakers! It's in THAT scenerio that I believe that wires are a component as critical as speakers!
If you want to debate beliefs lets do so! But do it honestly and stop intentionally misleading others through highly negatively-opinionated & misrepresenting statements that only represent your Lunatic Fringe Objectivist views of what you wished I was saying, instead of what I actually say and mean and if you're ever not sure of what I mean by what I say, ask and I'll clarify my beliefs for you, like I did for Kerr!
But believe this, the ONLY person who believes what you post about Subjectivists and their true beliefs is you and those you actually end up misleading...
The assertion that cables are as or more important than speakers is tough to swallow, even for a subjectivist.
...source problems trump speaker problems. One does get used to different speakers (or the same speakers placed differently in a room), after which one *always* begins to hear defects in the source.Cables are part of the source, therefore always part of the problem.
The assertion that cables are as or more important than speakers is tough to swallow, even for a subjectivist.
I find them to be equally important. My system sounded the same when I removed the cables as it did when I removed the speakers.
se
Since you are obviously an experimenter, I'll save you the trouble of testing cable directionality by giving you my methodology and conclusions. When I listened to cables hooked up properly as per the directional arrows, I put my ear close to the speaker at low volume and took note of the sound. When I changed directionality, I put my ear close to my CDP and took note of the sound. It sounded muffled. In fact, I'd state unequivocally that the CDP emitted no sound whatsoever and what I was hearing was merely crosstalk from the speakers.
Since you are obviously an experimenter, I'll save you the trouble of testing cable directionality by giving you my methodology and conclusions. When I listened to cables hooked up properly as per the directional arrows, I put my ear close to the speaker at low volume and took note of the sound. When I changed directionality, I put my ear close to my CDP and took note of the sound. It sounded muffled. In fact, I'd state unequivocally that the CDP emitted no sound whatsoever and what I was hearing was merely crosstalk from the speakers.Directionality matters! :)
Ah, but WHICH ear did you use?
se
> Ah, but WHICH ear did you use? <
DAMN! Back to the drawing board - thanks a lot!
Anytime. What are friends for? :)
se
> Anytime. What are friends for? :) <
z
"I can honestly say that I have never heard more startlingly real-sounding recordings than his. They are closely miked, because that suits the program material, and the sound is in your face, as lifelike as if you were there. I have shut my eyes on occasion and could easily pretend that I was there. Is it because of “no mixing board, filtering, compression, equalization, noise reduction, multitracking or overdubbing,” as it says in the blurb? Maybe so, maybe not, but the sound speaks for itself."----Peter Aczel, "Mapleshade CDs: Hog Heaven for Audiophiles."
http://theaudiocritic.com/cwo/Web_Zine/Currently, The Audio Critic requires a subscription (that will change in January 2007), so I can't link directly to the article.
He doesn't think so highly of the music values. Richard Greene also thinks the recordings are usually great but the music is not so great.
The fact is that judgments about sound quality recordings and judgments about the efficacy of tweaks used to make them are separate issues. As Clifff points out, he seems to use good basic recording techniques.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
a collection of recordings I made with a crossed pair of condenser mics feeding a Revox 1/2track A77 recorder at 15"/sec. All done over 30 years ago in local churches, etc.They are still stunning in their lifelike accoustic. I know the accoustic; the church is 1Km from me.
I'm sure it is not a patch on Mapleshade's recordings being only amateur/semi pro equipment and very old!
But I did not, and still do not, use any sort of special cables or tweaks.
Are you assuming that the recordings are good BECAUSE of all the tweaks they ALSO sell?I could only find this quote on their website:
"We record live to two-track analog, transfer to digital at a rate 100 times faster than the CD standard, and use no add-on EQ, reverb or noise reduction electronics. Our recordings are made with only 2 to 4 microphones and no cables longer than 20 feet."
Which seems a pretty good reason to end up with life-like recordings.
Have you found a place where they say that they use all there own tweaks on their recording equipment and that this is why they sound so good? If not then you are perhaps jumping to conclusions.
I've been there (the studio), seen how Pierre used resonance damping, cable-related, and other tweaks to achieve the sonic quality clearly evident in the recordings.
No Clifff I am NOT assuming that the recordings are good BECAUSE of all the tweaks they ALSO sell, but rather because if you get the cataloge Mapleshade mails out, they talk about using their own wires, stands, etc when recording and THAT'S how they know it works!Now I'll admit they could be lying, but I'm not quite that cynical because I haven't caught them in a lie. So until I do, they get the benefit of the doubt, at least from me. Especially considering how good their recordings sound!
You can either request they send you a cataloge or I might have a spare to send you.
... when you say that they say they use their own wires and stands etc. I'm sure they do.But if they don't make recordings WITHOUT these items which are then noticeably inferior then nothing is proved.
Clifff and anyone else whose interested, here are some quotes taken directly from Mapleshades (FALL 06) cataloge they mail out...PG 25 "At every step from my studio mikes to your home speakers, there are a maddening number of factors that degrade good sound (and good music). On the recording front, that's forced me to research everything from making pianos sound better to designing better mikes, better CABLING (emphasis added), and better vibration-controlling mounts for my gear."
PG 27 "NEVER use speaker cables shorter than 8'. Amazingly, 4' sounds much worse than 8'. Contrary to common belief, shorter interconnects (2m or less) and longer speaker cables sound WAY BETTER than the opposite--based on extensive head-to-head tests."
PG 29 "Twenty years of striving to make perfect-sounding recordings has taught me that WIRE IS A COMPONENT JUST AS CRITICAL AS SPEAKERS OR AMPS". and in another paragraph on the same page, "We've tested literally thousands of variations on wire alloy, shape, and insulation. THE RESULTING AUDIO CABLE DESIGNS ARE AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE REMARKABLY LIFELIKE SOUND OF MAPLESHADE CDS" (emphasis added).
PG 33 "Just like speaker cables, the wires that hook your CD player to your amp (the interconnects) can make as much or more difference than your speakers."
PG 38 "Who would have thought three brass footers could TRANSFORM (emphasis added) the sound of each of your stereo components--your speakers, CD/DVD player, amp, receiver, turntable, power conditioner? I guarantee exactly that."
These are some of the factors that Mapleshade states attributes to make their recordings sound so remarkably lifelike. Of course no one has to agree, but I believe it's illogical to first praise a recording and then later berate the recording engineer, when he explains the methods he uses to achieve the recordings you find to be so incredibly good, because you don't believe the improvements/tweaks can be proven to work via DBTs!
The recordings benefit from no studio processing and no mixing -- that means the original two-track mastertape does not have to be mixed down to a second generation two-track mastertape.The Mapleshade CD mastertape can be a copy of a first-generation mastertape.
Typical CDs are often not even made from a second-generation mastertape (except when Steve "From the original mastertape" Hoffman is involved.)
What if the Mapleshade "studio" walls are painted green.
Does that mean if we like the sound quality, then green walls were the cause?
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
a
And you'd be 100% correct in that assessment Norm!
I cannot believe it! RBG the KING of the Objectivist Lunatic Fringe, believes I picked all of the MOST bizzare claims in the catalog! The reality is they are NOT bizzare!PG 25 I agree with 100% I have proved to myself that beyond a shadow of a doubt that better CABLING & VIBRATION-CONTROLLING devices improve the sound of a system quite dramtically for the better!
PG 27 I cannot agree or disagree I've never used speaker cables shorter than 8'. So I don't know if shorter cables sound worse or not.
PG 29 I agree 100% over 37 years of striving to perfect my audio systems has taught me that WIRES ARE A COMPONENT JUST AS CRITICAL AS SPEAKERS OR AMPS!
PG 33 I agree 100% I've heard changes in SOME interconnects make as much or more difference than changing SOME speakers.
PG 38 I agree 100% (In principle) I believe, but haven't yet proved to myself that brass footers "could" transform the sound of audio components. The reason I believe in principle is I heard a VPI "Magic Brick" transform an Audio Research amplifier. Funny part is when Leo Oxley put the VPI "Magic Brick" on the amp, I heard no difference. Even 10 minutes later I couldn't hear a difference, yet the moment he removed the VPI "Magic Brick" from the amp, the sound became blurred and a lot less transparent. That tweak amazed me!
So YES, RBG I believe Mapleshade when they state these are some of the factors that attribute to making their recordings sound so remarkably lifelike!
As I said before I believe it's illogical to first praise a recording and then later berate the recording engineer, when he explains the methods he uses to achieve the recordings you find to be so incredibly good, because you don't believe the improvements/tweaks can be proven to work via DBTs! But then again this is NOT only a member, but rather the KING of the Objectivist Lunatic Fringe I'm responding to, so I guess that in itself explains your illogical reasoning of your post!
Speakers = all audiophiles hear A-B differences, whether sighted or blind auditions are usedWires = components no audiophiles can prove to witnesses they hear A-B differences when brand names are hidden and SPL's are matched
Any audiophile who says wires are just as critical as speakers is a deluded audiophile lost in a fantasy world. Even the ultimate WireNut Jon Risch has written that differences among wires are "subtle" (although no witnesses have even come forward to verify his claimed ability to hear wire differences under double-blind conditions ... or your claimed abilities).
I hereby certify you as an audio wacko (aka WireNut).
With no respect, as usual;
BassNut
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
ONLY RBG believes a well trained ear equates to having extraordinary hearing abilities! Even Peter Aczel admits "The Golden Ears want you to believe that their hearing is so keen, so exquisite, that they can hear tiny nuances of reproduced sound too elusive for the rest of us. Absolutely not true. ANYONE (emphasis added) without actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but only those with training and experience know what to make of it, (and) how to interpret it."RBG is the king of the Lunatic Fringe Objectivists here at A.A. thank GOD many Objectivists are that wacky!
> PG 33 "Just like speaker cables, the wires that hook your CD player to your amp (the interconnects) can make as much or more difference than your speakers." <As much or more than speakers??? Pretty far-fetched. I will admit that I haven't tried his wires but I have yet to try any that made as much difference as speakers.
Yes Kerr from my own personal experience I happen to KNOW that SOME speaker wire & SOME interconnects can make at least as much or possibly more difference than speakers!Now I haven't heard ANY Mapleshade wires (interconnects, speakerwire or power cords) so I don't know what type or amount of effect they typically have. However some recent home experiments are leading me to believe that fairly thin wire with as little dielectric as possible (meaning the thinner the dielectric coating the better) provided the dielectric continues working as designed, makes for a better i.e. more faithful replication of music.
Whether you agree with me or not doesn't matter to me at all. I'll continue to allow my ear to be the final arbitrator of produces the most realistic replication of music to me and then adjust as needed in order to incorporate these improvements into my system. You of course are free to choose whatever means you desire on your own system to improve it's sound.
> Whether you agree with me or not doesn't matter to me at all. <And it shouldn't. I guess it's not so much that I disagree with you - it's more than your experiences and mine are 180 degrees apart. I've heard lots of cables in lots of applications and I've never once felt that the change was anything more than subtle. Significant in many cases but not anything like the differences between speakers... or as Clark pointed out, like the differences in the same pair of speakers with different positioning. But your experience is your experience and who am I to argue it? Enjoy!
Kerr,If you don't mind I'd like to try and restate this so you might, perhaps have a better understanding of what I believe and what I believe Mapleshade is saying, ok?
First let me say that I've heard a pair of Audioquest Emerald interconnects make a larger improvement in sound than changing from $2K OCM 88 preamp to a $4K Counterpoint SA5000 preamp.
Still having said that I don't believe any Subjectivist, myself and Mapleshade included is stating that EVERYTIME you change an interconnect, speakerwire or power cord, the change is going to be as dramatic as the changes you might hear when you change between some speakers.
Why? because when you're thinking of the differences in speakers you're probably thinking of the major differences in sound between completely different speakers like a Quad ESL and say an AR9. Now although I believe with some great effort & time you MIGHT be able to hear such a dramatic difference in wires, one needs to consider that an Quad ESL & an AR9 Dynamic speaker are completely different technologies, so you'd probably notice the change in the sound of the different technologies a lot quicker than with wires. Afterall all interconnects are basically the same technology, no?
That said if we took 10 $5K dynamic speakers, I'd know that the changes in wires could be more dramatic than the change in different $5K dynamic speakers! Now in that light it's now a lot easier to believe that wires can make as much or more difference than your speakers, no?
It's not an always in every single case dramatic improvement. It's just an understanding that wires are an important part of your system, as important as any component you buy! Think of it more like this, you need to take the same amount of time choosing wires as you would between selecting which of the 10 different $5K dynamic speakers you'd choose to use in your system. It's in THAT scenerio were wires can make as much or more difference than your choice speakers!
Thetubeguy1954
a
nt
T
d
Well all I can say is the very man who makes the recording attributes the wires, speaker stands, heavy brass footers etc as being a reason his recordings sound so good (and most seem to agree with his recordings are very good)Of course he now sells these very items so in the minds of the cynical that alone is enough reason NOT to believe him. I personally have never heard any of his components so I cannot speak with any authority on the matter.
People here are pretty ignorant, in general.
When we make quality recordings, EVERYTHING is taken into account. Wires, tape, mikes, acoustics, etc,etc. This is normal for a hi end recording. When we went each year to the CES to show our equipment, we ALWAYS made special cables just for that event, and even broke them in, in advance. That sort of attention to detail is what made us successful. It is true that once, long ago, we used cheap wires, but no more. It would be like putting cheap recap tires on a Porsche and expecting the same performance. Perhaps, to and from the store, it would be OK, but not in competition with other cars, either on the track or for just driving for pleasure.
I know, what could I possibly know about the subject?
jc: ""
That sort of attention to detail is what made us successful.""Que??
Success as measured by what???
Success is measured in audiophile appreciation of our efforts.
However, I have a question to ask you, Jneutron. Do you use Lemo and Fischer connectors to any great extent on your connecting cables at your lab? What wire do you usually recommend for your interconnects at work, you know the low current ones? I have a bunch of Lemos here and I am curious about them.
I have a bunch of Lemos here and I am curious about them.
Ditch the Lemos and get yourself some Redels. :)
se
What's a Redel BTW?
What's a Redel BTW?
Redels are essentially the plastic version of the Lemo B series connectors which use metal shells.
se
Hi JohnI use the Lemo's for connections to three motion control axis on my motion control widgets. They were a pain in the butt to wire up, though, but I do like the positive lock. But my application is not very difficult there, as I built hardening into the noise sensitive circuits, things like opto-isolation.
The test guys don't bother with either Lemo's or Fischers for a couple of reasons. First is temperature...we make our own connectors when they have to go into liquid helium, as most connector plastics are not rated for that. We use lots of hypertronics though, and make the connector package custom. Gold on gold is always preferred.
For low level signals at and about 1 microvolt, we have never found any problems with connector contact materials (that I'm aware of).
For the wire, we generally use copper, many different guages, with kapton wrapped insulation against the copper, and Tefzel coating around the kapton. The kapton retains flexibility at 4.2 Kelvin with a monstrous dielectric withstanding of 6Kv per .001 inch, and the tefzel remains somewhat flexible but more importantly, is very durable against chafing and manhandling.
For temp sensors, we use phosphor bronze wire, in stupidly small guages like 34 or 36, but that is just to reduce heat transfer along the wire.
If you wish, I can ask around here to see if any other division uses both to any degree. However, quite honestly, once contact reliability is taken care of, we have found (again, to the best of my knowledge) that a wire is basically a wire, and connector materials are not anything special.
But unlike audio, we worry about and take care of normally mundane things like loop pickup, stray inductance, and vibration induced noise, as they can be very large with kiloamps and tesla's involved.
Sorry I cannot be of more help..Like I said, I will ask other groups if you wish.
Cheers, John
Thanks for your input.
nt
People here are pretty ignorant, in general.Time to take your anti-paranoia medication, I see...
.../...
I know, what could I possibly know about the subject?
Stop embarassing yourself this way, please.
I know that artists are said to suffer and show excessive emotional states to express the best of their talent.
I know that you consider high-end designer as artists ( BTW, so do I, but also designers of many professional equipment outside audio, that's a difference with you ).
Whence I can bet that your presence among us ignoramuses is aimed at your designing better gear through suffering, an act of contrition...Anyway, thanks, you gave me a good laugh at my morning caffee. Good before a meeting with the accountant.
It is not 'paranoia', but annoyance of you people with no real background in audio design or high end professional recording, second guess their efforts. This is the best place to express that annoyance. I would hate to see this website fall to the depths of several other websites that pick and poke at audio quality and the efforts to achieve it. Don't you people have anything else to do?
"...pick and poke at audio quality and the efforts to achieve it. Don't you people have anything else to do?For as long as you've been here, I would think you could answer your own (obviously rhetorical) question! :)
What never fails to tickle me is how much virtual ink is spilled by objectivists arguing that which they believe does not exist i.e cable and amp sonics, etc. I spend ZERO minutes of my life discussing the absence of "something". Those who do obviously have nothing better to fill their time.
Kerr,Your statement: "What never fails to tickle me is how much virtual ink is spilled by objectivists arguing that which they believe does not exist i.e cable and amp sonics, etc. I spend ZERO minutes of my life discussing the absence of "something". Those who do obviously have nothing better to fill their time." Is OUTSTANDING! I have to admit I never looked at it from that POV before. It made me smile, thanks!
Objectivists liken cable/amp/preamp "beliefs" with beliefs about Bigfoot and UFO's which they (and I) believe don't exist. Fine. When the subject comes up, I say I don't believe and that's that. Whether I'm into zoology or aerospace science has no relevance. Things either are or they aren't... or better stated... either I believe they are or they aren't. Once stated, I'm done because the believers can't give me a good reason to spend time on the subject. So I always chuckle when I see someone spend SO much time arguing about things audio that they don't believe. I find it to be a waste of time but then again, maybe they have no better use for theirs.
Ah, yes, but you do seem to have time to write extensively about how objectivists are wasting their time doing things you wouldn't do. I'd think you'd have better use for YOUR time...!
> Ah, yes, but you do seem to have time to write extensively about how objectivists are wasting their time doing things you wouldn't do. I'd think you'd have better use for YOUR time...! <No, I'm writing "extensively" about how they spend so much time posting about things that don't exist in their world. See the difference?
Besides, I'm on hold with the IRS - nothing to do besides wait for them to transfer me again and again and all because I want to do business in Poland. Sheesh!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: