|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.255.200.192
In Reply to: RE: Youtube Video on the Placebo Effect. posted by oldmkvi on July 17, 2022 at 06:35:34
that Audioholics is where militant deaf inmates like Mytrycrafts, AJinFLA, etc. go when they're banned here and elsewhere. There they talk all about what they've never experienced with like minded folks.
Regarding bi-wiring, I have no dog in the race since I use full range electrostats. I still have to smile, however, when I hear *experts* like Gene pontificate and think they know more about speaker design than Kevin Voecks, Carl Marchisotto, Richard Vandersteen among others. ;)
Follow Ups:
Angered by their honest, science and reality based reporting. Must be scary
thoroughly amused. ;)
You must be a hoot at parties.
at least you guys had that in common. Mutual disrespect
Ammar Jadusingh, aka AJinFLA is a frustrated speaker designer who loved the term "voodoo" and hated everything that related to audiophiles. He had his minute in the spotlight ten years ago.
Here's a really funny post .
He most likely didn't like my bettering him. ;)
no doubt he thinks you are frustrated and didn't like him besting you. But is that the guy you want to be a match to?
Edits: 07/23/22
Voodoo and hates audiophiles? That sounds like our own Toxic Avenger. Are they the same person? OMG.
"Angered by their honest, science and reality based reporting. Must be scary"
When science is presented in an honest way, it is impossible for someone to get "angry" over it...... For real science always have a path for question and refinement.
If someone is getting angry over "science," it is likely because the science is being misrepresented with inflexible finality.....
sounds like a great philosophy and it just isn't reality. we still have creationism, climate change denial and people who insist the moon landing was faked.
Science denial has become the pervasive mind set in this country. Audiophilia is a poster child for it
"we still have creationism, climate change denial and people who insist the moon landing was faked."
Who's passing the first item as scientific? I've known people who think creation is a Biblical explanation of what took place in billions of years of evolution...... (The science wasn't well known in Biblical days.)
The second item, nobody can even come up with a definitive definition of "climate change"...... (Some people think that foreign powers are trying to "change the climate"..... ) Being vague is not part of the scientific method.... And accusing people of "denying" something vague is not scientific at all.
The third item can be explained scientifically..... (See link.) But questioning it does not necessarily make one "anti-science"..... It just needs to be explained better..... The best explanation for the moon landings is to ask whether low gravity can be replicated on a stage set...... To where it is indistinguishable from the footage taken from the Apollo moon landings. (It's almost impossible to walk at a fast enough speed to make jumping look like "slow motion" by comparison. The stage set must also be large enough because some objects were propelled at a long distance.)
"Science denial has become the pervasive mind set in this country."
There is no such thing as "science denial"..... Science is to be explained and/or questioned, not dogmatically believed or denied......
"Audiophilia is a poster child for it"
Not everybody has a science background..... Hence it should never be a requisite for audiophilia.....
One can try to explain the science, but those making buying decisions inconsistent with those explanations aren't "denying" science..... People like what they like, and are merely not buying into those explanations......
Improve the science, maybe more people will make decisions based on it.
Your biggest mistake is the belief that science at a given point has finality. Science can always be improved or refined, and should never become doctrine for how people should or should not behave.
Audiophilia is in my opinion an important check on the recording industry..... If audiophilia didn't exist, we'd now have every recording Auto-Tuned to where nothing would be recognizable anymore. Audiophiles questioned the science of Auto-Tune, for the betterment for both music and science. With the refinement of the science (thank you Wings of Pegasus), there is now no scientific explanation to justify its use.
Thank you for demonstrating my point
"Thank you for demonstrating my point"
You're welcome......
there's some kind of new theory now that the Grassy Noll shooter was from Virginia, and they are closing in
The word is knoll, not noll, Beavis.
get ready
Nt
pinhead GFY
Do you dress up in her clothes when you're feeling down?
Edits: 07/22/22 07/22/22
Pretty sure those are examples of non-scientific conspiracy theories. Another conspiracy theory I just ran across recently was the man who fatally shot JFK was a secret service guy In the car behind the JFK car who was holding an AR15 rifle that accidentally discharged during all the shooting when the car he was in suddenly braked. The AR15 was known to have an issue of firing inadvertently due to design flaw. Of course the fact is in the video JFKs slams violently BACK, and his brain matter blown all over the rear deck of the convertible he was riding in, which appears to refute any theory that includes shots fired from behind JFK, except possible the first one that hit him and those riding in the front seat.At the same time it would obviously be a logical error to make the argument that just because there are such things as conspiracy theories then anything you wish to discredit is non scientific or a conspiracy theory. As QAnalog Scott often does. In his works it's always the other guy who's not scientific. Lol
Edits: 07/22/22
"The AR15 was known to have an issue of firing inadvertently due to design flaw."
The Google search (link) suggests that this above statement is patently false..... Sorry......
Also note that saying an "AR15 has a design flaw" is like saying an "airplane has a design flaw"..... Both could have radically different designs (a Cessna and a Boeing 757, for example), yet still fall under such designations.
Now a specific airplane..... The Boeing 737 Max, for example, does have serious design flaws..... And I would personally avoid flying in that aircraft, if such occasion were to come forth. (There is probably a specific brand and model of AR15 that does have a problem with accidental discharges. But for one model of AR15 that has such flaw, there are over hundreds of brands and models that don't.)
"At the same time it would obviously be a logical error to make the argument that just because there are such things as conspiracy theories then anything you wish to discredit is non scientific or a conspiracy theory."
The term "conspiracy theory" has been bandied about too often in recent time, often treating the one stating it was someone who should be banned from discussion forums. (I've personally been banned from a discussion board expressly for "posting conspiracy theories"... ) It's as if stating a "conspiracy theory" is even worse than stating a lie.
Actually, if you look deeper you'll find the reason the military didn't buy the AR15 until the beginning of Vietnam era several years later was because the "fatal design flaw" - so to speak - was a firing pin that was too heavy, causing the AR15 to sometimes suddenly fire without warning. But the SS Secret Service used them AR15s back then because of their great firepower, using 7.62 NATO rounds. AND selectable automatic or semiautomatic fire. So, in fact the conspiracy theory is plausible from that angle of a misfiring AR15 right behind the Kennedy limo at a moment when the SS car lurched or braked suddenly. OR it could have been intentional, an even better conspiracy theory. You know, what with the missing texts and everything. The SS was part of a bigger conspiracy. Recall the second investigation found there was probably a conspiracy involved but ran out of funding before going further.
"Actually, if you look deeper you'll find the reason the military didn't buy the AR15 until the beginning of Vietnam era several years later was because the 'fatal design flaw' - so to speak - was a firing pin that was too heavy, causing the AR15 to sometimes suddenly fire without warning."
Firing pin too heavy? I Googled the subject matter and....... (Three results.... No mention of AR15..... )
I hope you're not making this up.
Include these statements (from official report)
"Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."
Recall the conspiracy theory can be either accidental or on purpose shooting. The accidental shooting could have involved his finger on the trigger OR not on the trigger. I should add that the violent backward motion of jfk's head at moment of impact seems to indicate a shooter in front of jfk, not behind him. The huge hole in the BACK of jfk's head the same.
As often pointed out the flat trajectory of that bullet that struck his head doesn't match the trajectory of the first bullet, the one that hit his throat and went on to wound the two guys in the front seat. The one presumably from book depository. So, then you've got yourself a REAL CONSPIRACY on your hands, right? Which is what the second assassination commission concluded, that the murder was a conspiracy, not a single shooter (Oswald or whoever).
When was Mtrycrafts banned here?
How was Gene de la Salla pontificating about those speaker designers?
Or are you just making it up?
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
Who knows? Or cares? Not one of his posts remains here.
How was Gene de la Salla pontificating about those speaker designers?
Watch the video and his *conclusion* about bi-wiring. Richard Vandersteen would shred his ignorance. :)
For some reason, Mtrycrafts still sticks in your craw, after 20 years or so!
Obviously you did not do a search on Mtrycrafts. If you had, you could find a number of old posts.
So now you are providing me with an authority, Richard Vandersteen. Unfortunately, geoffkait has told us that an argument from authority is a logical fallacy.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
For some reason, Mtrycrafts still sticks in your craw, after 20 years or so!You mistake my enjoying him as a great source of humor! You cannot get any more clueless. I encountered him on AR as well . :)
Obviously you did not do a search on Mtrycrafts.
Actually, I did but searched for him as user, not "text". Banned and officially gone, the posts that remain indeed do not locate such an inmate.
So now you are providing me with an authority, Richard Vandersteen.
In prior posts, I mentioned three. Voecks is a former NRC guy who's the lead at Revel. Gene's tinkering around with the concept is not the same as those who have been employing that in their speakers for decades.
edit: After reminiscing a bit, I found this one .
Edits: 07/20/22
Any citations of him making this claim?
Richard Vandersteen is a great speaker designer. but that doesn't mean he's right about bi-wiring.
"Richard Vandersteen is a great speaker designer. but that doesn't mean he's right about bi-wiring."
Are you questioning the science? .... [-;
nope. The science is clear. Biwiring doesnt make an aduible differnece if you are already using competent speaker cables. I am pointing out that Richard Vandersteen can be a great speaker designer and still be wrong in his opinion about biwiring.
"The science is clear. Biwiring doesnt make an aduible differnece if you are already using competent speaker cables."
So what are the criteria that make speaker cables "competent?" ....
"I am pointing out that Richard Vandersteen can be a great speaker designer and still be wrong in his opinion about biwiring."
But Mr. Vandersteen represents science..... So quit being so anti-science...... It's embarrassing...... ;-]
nt
Maybe MIT or NASA will step up and figure this out.
"So what are the criteria that make speaker cables "competent?" ...."
capacitance, inductance and resistance
"But Mr. Vandersteen represents science....."
No, Richard Vandersteen does not represent science. 1. He isn't even a scientist. 2. No individual scientist represents science. There are no authorities in science. The only authority in science are the principles of science and the scientific method and objective evidence. When it comes to cables the evidence is the authority. And that evidence has spoken quite loudly and clearly. 3. Even scientists can be wrong. Heck, Einstein, one of the most famous scientists known to man was wrong in his opinion about the nature of qauntum mechanics and he was one of the primary scientists in the discovery of quantum physics.
"So quit being so anti-science...... It's embarrassing...... ;-]"
As embarassing as not knowing what actually is and is not anti-scientific?
"So what are the criteria that make speaker cables "competent?" ...."
capacitance, inductance and resistance
ALL cables have capacitance, inductance and resistance..... Even the worst snake oil products......
"So quit being so anti-science...... It's embarrassing...... ;-]"
As embarassing as not knowing what actually is and is not anti-scientific?
Exactly.....
The problem is someone claiming that he knows but lacks the realization that he does not.
> > > So what are the criteria that make speaker cables "competent?" ....> > >
> > capacitance, inductance and resistance > >
> ALL cables have capacitance, inductance and resistance..... Even the worst snake oil products......>
Yes. but the ones that have too much start to act as a passive equalizer and skew the audible frequency response. That's when the cables become "incompetently" designed. The ones that don't have too much are competently designed and don't audibly color the sound. Of course this is assuming the design goal is maximum audible transparency. A cable may be designed to color the sound on purpose.But we can call that a combination cable/passive equalizer.
and I did forget to mention basic shielding built into the design. If a cable doesn't have that then it is also "incompetently" designed.
I guess if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, you baffle them with bullshit......
once again you take the blatant anti-science anti electrical engineering position. There is no bullshit about the facts I stated when it comes to cable "sound." You may as well be saying evolution is bullshit.
But I'm not sure you didn't already say that....
Nt
shouldn't you be bagging aquarium gravel in your car/apartment? Or have sales and suckers who buy your B.S. all dried up leaving you nothing better to do than troll AA?
nt
:-)
Have you thought of asking your doctor to increase your medications?
Edits: 07/23/22
You're a little late to the Logical Fallacy party.
Or do you just sream logical fallacy eveytime someone who calls you out on your scam business posts anything on these forums?
Try to break out of your reality bubble, Bubble Boy.
Edits: 07/21/22
look in the mirror bro, If you have a bathroom of your own to use
They can also be just mental.
Edits: 07/22/22
Along with Nola designer Carl Marchisotto.
do you have a link?
Try thinking about it Captain Obvious...
feel free to prove me wrong and do something as simple as posting a valid link to an actual quote in context. I look forward to your continued posturing because ya got nothin
you have to engage Alon Wolf of Magico Loudspeakers and ask him why he only provides ONE pair of terminals on the back of his speakers.
Then wait a while. :-)
Nt
... it is just another good example of how experienced professionals in ANY industry or professional often disagree about the best solution or answer for a particular situation.
We're saying the same thing, actually. That's why it's an appeal to authority - a logical fallacy -even when the person used to support an argument is an expert in the field.
In cases like this, both sides of the argument are doing exactly the same thing -- declaring =their= guy to be the recognized expert, and therefore, their position has greater authority than the other side's. I've seen this in my field (commercial insurance) where I've been an "expert witness" deployed against the other side's "expert witness." I've also see this as an observer in a number of lawsuits, such as medical malpractice claims.
In none of the above is either side automatically committing a "logical fallacy." Each expert is simply presenting their opinion based on their long experience and specialization in their field.
At least in the particular situation of this thread, there is not much at stake.
It's a logical fallacy in any argument to mention a person who is either an expert in the field or an expert in any field, related or not, and expect by using that person's name and opinion you automatically win the argument - no matter which side of the argument you're on. That's why it's called a logical fallacy, the fallacy is believing that's enough evidence or proof to win the argument. It's also sometimes called name dropping.Einstein said there's no such thing as black holes, but you would lose the argument if you used Einstein as you supporting evidence. That's why they call that particular logical fallacy an Appeal to Authority.
Another popular audiophile logical fallacy is Appeal to Age/experience. Example, I have more than 30 years of experience in high end audio so you can trust me when I say ___ .
Edits: 07/19/22 07/19/22 07/19/22 07/19/22
Interesting discussion, but back in 1939 when Einstein said there were no black holes, there was no way for anyone on either side of the argument to prove their point.
In his paper, Einstein said that while the idea of black holes was suggested by his theory of relativity, it was "not convincing" rather than impossible -- quite a different approach from a dogmatic appeal to authority.
There is nothing wrong with being an expert in one's field, but the trick is that the qualified person can back it up with data and a good explanation rather than "because I say so."
That reminds me of a fellow named Arnold I knew some decades ago who was very proud of his 20 years worth of experience in my industry. Sadly, he was often wrong. I thought the best explanation from one of my colleagues was "Arnold's problem is not his 20 years of experience, but rather that its been the same year over, and over, and over...."
You are misunderstanding what Appeal to Authority means. Einstein's theory or opinion regarding black holes is not the issue. It's when someone, let's say he's an audiophile, uses Einstein to support an argument, that is an Appeal to Authority. It doesn't matter whether Einstein was right or wrong about black holes or anything else. It's a simple case of name dropping. I used the example of black holes to show you Einstein wasn't always right about everything, which is probably what most people assume. He wasn't right about quantum mechanics either.Another example, if there's an argument regarding wire directionality, if someone says he knows a PhD in electronics who says wire directionality is hogwash, that is an Appeal to Authority, it's a type of argument thst looks sort of good on the surface since the dude's friend is a PHD, right? But the PhD can't be there to be questioned or cross examined so to speak - that's another reason why it's a logical fallacy. As you said, experts can be on both sides of the argument. So whose expert is right? This is part of the problem in audio discussions of a technical nature usually but could be anything. It's often exceedingly difficult to get to the bottom of any debate on any topic. Take for example, how electricity works in cables, in particular cables in audio systems.
Edits: 07/19/22 07/19/22 07/19/22 07/19/22 07/19/22
But, that's a thing for some.
Knowing how to argue is half the battle. I was a master debater in college.
Alon Wolf why he doesn't accommodate bi-wiring on his speakers!
Trust me, it's worth it.
"Alon Wolf why he doesn't accommodate bi-wiring on his speakers!"
The user guide for the Magico Model 5 states there are two sets of terminals, and "bi-wiring" is stated as an option.......
Nt
It could be that the designer doesn't believe in bi-wiring, but has it in his products in case some of his customers opt for it...... A good designer gives his products those options, even if he himself doesn't believe in them.
Chances are good that some purchasers of these speakers had bi-wiring or bi-amping as part of the decision process.
Who probably has the best sounding system?1. High end amplifier manufacturer
2. High end cable manufacturer
3. System engineer
4. EE Electrical Engineer
5. Tweak manufacturer
6. Speaker manufacturer
7. Senior AES member
8. Controlled blind testing guru
9. Musician
10. Physics PhD
Edits: 07/20/22
When you argue away any attempts at rationality, what is left?
Who probably has the best sounding system?
Jay from Jay's Audio Lab (link)..... (Stress the word "probably"..... )
1. High end amplifier manufacturer
2. High end cable manufacturer
3. System engineer
4. EE Electrical Engineer
I don't know.....
5. Tweak manufacturer
You can answer that one..... ;-]
6. Speaker manufacturer
7. Senior AES member
8. Controlled blind testing guru
I don't know......
9. Musician
Classical: Vladimir Horowitz....
Rock: Jimi Hendrix or Neil Peart......
Jazz: Louis Armstrong.....
10. Physics PhD
Albert Einstein.......
I can't help wondering what Jay's position is on wire and cable directionality. Where someone stands on that dodgy subject alone tells me a lot how a person's system would sound. I don't have to know anything else. I don't have to see photos of his system or see a list of his system. Does that surprise you?
Edits: 07/22/22
"I can't help wondering what Jay's position is on wire and cable directionality. Where someone stands on that dodgy subject alone tells me a lot how a person's system would sound."
The cables he uses have "filter networks" on them.... I guess they go in a certain direction, but don't know for sure.
"I don't have to know anything else. I don't have to see photos of his system or see a list of his system. Does that surprise you?"
You can see pretty clearly what he has in the videos..... (If you watch enough of his recent videos, you'll know exactly what he has.) The components he has cost more than my house several times over...... I do think his approach to system building is somewhat strange, but who am I to judge?
Most cables designed for audio have directional designators, and I generally follow them. I do think it makes a difference, but I'm not sure if I could pass an ABX test.....
I am referring to the "controversial idea" that all wire and therefore all cables and fuses are "directional." What that means is that, generally speaking, setting aside cables with filter networks and shielding, all (rpt all) wires, cables, interconnects, digital cables, fuses, HDMI cables, etc. sound better in one direction vs the other direction. This is true for stranded and solid core cables. I am referring here to wires and cables and fuses in AC circuits (I.e., audio circuits) as well as DC circuits. Since this idea of wire directionality is controversial I like to use it to gauge peoples' audio IQ, as it were.
Edits: 07/22/22
you've spilled more ink just talking about!
No one cares. :)
Besides, I heard Magicos suck. :-)
"you have to engage Alon Wolf of Magico Loudspeakers and ask him why he only provides ONE pair of terminals on the back of his speakers."
That's a design decision..... But I personally don't think any design decision "validates" or "invalidates" a belief about a given practice in audio. One designer may think bi-wiring is an essential option, another may think it is totally unnecessary.
Vive la difference!
Nt
an Audioholics Warlord , now...
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: