General Asylum

In Reply to: RE: Hearing that thick boombox speaker cables are LOUDER than thin cables means nothing -- that's no test posted by Richard BassNut Greene on June 09, 2008 at 16:08:45

Thus with the non-Monster equipped Panasonic boombox playing louder (more SPL's) the lower volume Monster equipped Panasonic boombox blew it away in the quality and quantity of bass, the midrange and it even had high frequencies totally lacking in the non-Monster equipped boombox. I have never before or since then hear a boombox sound good.

You seem to read only what you want to and disregard the rest. And believe it or not even you could hear the difference in speaker cables in a real blind test. These phony ones you believe in make me sick, and I really do feel sorry for you being so gullible.

And you still have not shown me two of anything from different manufacturers that sounds the same, I am still waiting. It is not out there from what I have read and heard. If you know of even two let me know of the make and models and I will try to arrange a test just so you can can quit believing this crap that is keeping you from enjoying excellent sound.


Music is love,
Mono is not music to my ears.
Give me stereo or give me silence!
Teresa

• Test methodology for your beloved boombox wire "test" is the worst I've read in 40 years as an audiophile - Richard BassNut Greene 07:52:59 06/10/08 (2)
  In Reply to: RE: You didn't read well the Monster rep even turned the Monster equipped down so the non-Monster would be louder. posted by Teresa on June 09, 2008 at 18:28:50

  You never use two different sources to test wires.
  
  You never use boomboxes for a test whose results you want to be relevant to home audio systems
  
  You never use ultra-thin 20AWG or 24AWG speaker wires typical of boomboxes in a test whose results you want to be relevant to home audio systems (audiophiles don't use such thin wires)
  
  You never let a manufacturer set up a test designed to sell his product and put money in his pocket.
  
  Using an uncontrolled test of two boomboxes is the WORST example of a "test" I've ever heard of in 40+ years as an audiophile.
  
  Even worse, I'll bet Monster Cable didn't actually test for audible differences -- they just asked people if they heard differences, and people said they heard differences between the ultra-thick wires and ultra-thin wires, which were probably not hidden from view!
  
  If I had one year to work on a wire test methodology, I could not come up with a test methodology worse than your oh-so-beloved-Monster Cable "test" to prove that wires sound different in home audio systems.
  
  Wait maybe I could. We'd only test Mothers doing dishes on the other side of a wall from the listening room! And then we'd combine that with the use of two different boomboxes in the next room.
  
  You don't have any patents on these test procedures, do you?
  .
  .
  .
  
  .
  .
  .
  
  Richard BassNut Greene
  "The Floyd R. Turbo of Bingham Farms Michigan"
  
  

  ---

  • The whole purpose of Monster's Boombox test is to PROVE no matter how cheap your stereo is EXCELLENT - Teresa 19:05:00 06/10/08 (1)
    In Reply to: RE: Test methodology for your beloved boombox wire "test" is the worst I've read in 40 years as an audiophile posted by Richard BassNut Greene on June 10, 2008 at 07:52:59

    cable makes a huge difference.
    
    They also did high-end tests with top of the line equipment as well. Everyone heard the big differences there as well.
    
    You said You never use ultra-thin 20AWG or 24AWG speaker wires typical of boomboxes in a test whose results you want to be relevant to home audio systems (audiophiles don't use such thin wires)
    
    Hot damn I finally got you to admit not all cables sound the same. One of the biggest advantage of upgraded cables is higher gages (lower numbers). I never thought I would get you to admit that. BassNut finally agrees cables sound different!!!!! About damn time!
    
    The boombox test is super important as it proves all equipment can benefit by upgraded cables!!!!!!
    
    Oh the cables were hidden from view, and the biggest comments were the better bass and less distortion.
    
    I just so happy you now admitting differences, we are making progress!
    
    Music is love,
    Mono is not music to my ears.
    Give me stereo or give me silence!
    Teresa
    
    

    ---

    • Teresa sez: "cable makes a huge difference" ... while WireNut Jon Risch sez: 'cable differences are subtle' ????????? - Richard BassNut Greene 09:15:16 06/11/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: The whole purpose of Monster's Boombox test is to PROVE no matter how cheap your stereo is EXCELLENT posted by Teresa on June 10, 2008 at 19:05:00

      RBG is right when he points out that not one audiophile has been able to demonstrate to witnesses that she could hear cable differences when the brand names were hidden and the SPL's were matched.
      
      The Risch post on wire audibility may have been worded slightly different then I've shown in the subject box, but his intent is represented by that paraphrase.
      
      Risch is a self-appointed Wire Guru and Alert Moderator of the AudioAsylum Wire Forum, the last I heard.
      
      Until you showed up, he made the most extraordinary claims about how well he could hear differences among wires.
      .
      .
      .
      Richard BassNut Greene
      "The Floyd R. Turbo of Bingham Farms Michigan"
      
      

      ---