Nice article by editor Jim Austin in Stereophile now. Mr. Chip 20 year anniversary. Bravo! Nt

The current operating state of old males
Submitted by Glotz on April 18, 2025 - 10:55am
who are now brainwashed by their own skepticism has increased 100 fold in the last 15 years.

If anything can be mistrusted to reduce and to satisfy their own superior position and intellect, it is done and with indignance and disrespect most times.

There is no desire to come to the writing or the writer for a conversation and to explore the 'gray' areas (at least 9 out of 10 times on this website). They are to be wholly ignored to extend their established dogma, however similar or different to the conviction of the writer. "Assume they are lying to you to sell a product..."

It is what I have found over 25 years of reading and posting here.

And everything in this audio hobby is gray areas. Insert a cheap, 1980's DAC into a new system of the highest caliber and experience the full value of 'gray', where only parts and bits make musical sense, drenched in distortion and noise and timing errors. How would a reviewer or writer make sense of that??

With patience, observation and earnest intent. One can do nothing else.

So why assume there is a nefarious agenda with every publication and writer?

Because it's just trivial jealousy- one person writing and one person reading. And all too often the reader is not the authority and without a voice.

They want a conversation with the writer, but they don't come to the table with a handshake first. So they resort to 'greedy reductionism' to validate themselves in relation to the writer. A strange assumptive position to take when respect between writer and reader is almost assumed- especially with liberal, intelligent writers that show a desire for a conversation- scientific or philosophical.

But there are times when prejudices and assumptions are thrown down and a new relationship is forged in mutual respect between writer and reader.

I find it here too. When the open hand is extended time and time again in the spirit of equal discovery, it creates trust and friendships and a conversation is suddenly created. Perspectives are broadened. A writer can also learn a trick from the reader and that writer becomes better at their craft.

seems like..., posted on April 22, 2025 at 10:37:25
acres verde Audiophile Posts: 774 Location: Big Easy Joined: November 13, 2004	...there is some poignant food for thought in this post.

JA says he bashes the chip because it has no plausible explanation., posted on April 23, 2025 at 08:29:04

Geoffkait
Manufacturer

Posts: 1236
Joined: July 2, 2024

So, has science become so mundane, set in its ways, and disinterested in learning something new that it furiously rejects anything that doesn't look normal? Sight unseen, it's judgment guided by gut reactions. This goes against the scientific method, obviously. Science was not built on gut reactions. Where is the curiosity, where is the rolling up the sleeves and at least attempt to get to the bottom of things? I have a hard time believing someone would think if he opened up an Intelligent Chip he would find an artificial atom. If he had been paying attention he would have known the insides were examined under a scanning electron microscope by an earnest Uber skeptic. Hel-loo!

That's weird...-, posted on April 23, 2025 at 12:27:59
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	You would think a PhD in Physics, from a good university, who was formerly the editor of Science magazine and now the Editor in Chief of a major hi end audio magazine would know what an artificial atom is. You know, considering it has been one of the most startling and technically fascinating discoveries in physics of the last 30 years.

is it clear..., posted on April 23, 2025 at 13:26:20
acres verde Audiophile Posts: 774 Location: Big Easy Joined: November 13, 2004	...that my comment pertains to Glotz's observations?

RE: is it clear..., posted on April 23, 2025 at 13:50:32
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Obviously

RE: JA says he bashes the chip because it has no plausible explanation., posted on April 23, 2025 at 17:40:38
tomservo Manufacturer Posts: 9314 Joined: July 4, 2002	Can't blame him, Incredible claims require an incredibly believable explanation, to be well, believable / convert the skeptic. Even with that, it may or may not be true just believable, to determine that requires a non-subjective comparison with the "with and without" cases or some "measure".

Incredible claims? You mean like improves the sound? Wild! Nt, posted on April 24, 2025 at 04:12:55
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

RE: That's weird...-, posted on April 24, 2025 at 05:15:47
tomservo Manufacturer Posts: 9314 Joined: July 4, 2002	Not a physicist but am curious about an artificial atom, how to make one and how it impacts what one hears. Is this something that can be explained in scientific or engineering terms?

RE: That's weird...-, posted on April 24, 2025 at 05:32:18

Geoffkait
Manufacturer

Posts: 1236
Joined: July 2, 2024

Excellent questions. There is no roadmap or textbook for using artificial atoms for audio. The audio application was discovered accidentally by a guy in China. An artificial atom in general is created in a nanotechnology lab according to how it is designed to behave or application, q dots have been used for a very long time the in medical field to illuminate tissue in humans. An artificial atom is the same size as a real atom, the difference being the center of an artificial atom is an empty space, there's no nucleus.

The Intelligent Chip ran out of hits/ power due to the "bluing" of the quantum dots inside the Intelligent Chip by CD laser which activates the a dots. Thus the frequency of the photon emission slowly degrades to where it's no longer effective in this application, the bluing is caused by the CD laser striking the quantum dots inside Mr. Chip.

There is a paper on how this all works for CD.

RE: JA says he bashes the chip because it has no plausible explanation., posted on April 28, 2025 at 12:24:56
rickmcinnis@dogwoodfabrics.com Audiophile Posts: 3041 Location: Atlanta Joined: December 15, 2003	Are you still selling these twenty years later? I went o your website and it looks like it has fallen into disuse.

RE: JA says he bashes the chip because it has no plausible explanation., posted on April 28, 2025 at 12:31:22
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Wow, color me surprised. Somebody has a good memory. Congrats! I'm a pinboy these days.

But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 13:43:33
Tre' Industry Professional Posts: 18059 Location: So. Cal. Joined: February 9, 2002	"sounds better" means different things to different people. Now if your claim was that it makes the frequency response of the system more accurate, then you would have something to measure and maybe you could prove that. Tre' Have Fun and Enjoy the Music "Still Working the Problem"

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 13:52:53
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	A customer of mine tried the demagnetizer on her head. It didn't do anything for the sound but she's a more attractive person now.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 14:41:40

tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 9314
Joined: July 4, 2002

Testing is how. What you need are two conditions to test for.

Like Does X make a difference or improvement you can hear?

Get a group of enthusiasts and as rapidly as possible switch back and forth between "with and without" and without any indication which was which. Everyone keeps track of A or B sounds best with a variety of music. With enough samples / listeners, one would get a pretty good idea if there was a difference between the two.
Landing on heads 6 out of 10 times means nothing but heads 600 out of 1000 that is something.

Doing this without knowledge of which was which forces one to depend on ears alone instead of what you know and see as well.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 14:53:09
Tre' Industry Professional Posts: 18059 Location: So. Cal. Joined: February 9, 2002	View YouTube Video Tre' Have Fun and Enjoy the Music "Still Working the Problem"

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 14:57:21
Tre' Industry Professional Posts: 18059 Location: So. Cal. Joined: February 9, 2002	"but heads 600 out of 1000 that is something" But that only indicates that there is a difference, not that it's "better". Tre' Have Fun and Enjoy the Music "Still Working the Problem"

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 28, 2025 at 16:27:28

Geoffkait
Manufacturer

Posts: 1236
Joined: July 2, 2024

"Does x make an improvement you can hear?"

That is a logical fallacy, here's why: because sometimes people can't hear any difference for many reasons not associated with the device under test. You know, things like the system has errors in it, the listener's hearing is not really as good as he believes it is, the test system isn't revealing enough, the tester didn't follow instructions. Whatever.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 03:30:13
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	You always post that video and it's irrelevant. Grasping at straws as usual.

It's not irrelevant. It shows how easily fooled we humans are., posted on April 29, 2025 at 07:32:02

Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 18059
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002

"People say believe half of what you see son, and none of what you hear"
Marvin Gaye

View YouTube Video

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

To be honest, it only shows how easily fooled you are. Nt, posted on April 29, 2025 at 07:50:42
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

In Geoffworld..., posted on April 29, 2025 at 08:14:39
13th Duke of Wymbourne Audiophile Posts: 3180 Location: Orange Co., Ca Joined: September 19, 2001	It is up to others to prove him wrong. He owes no explanation of anything. So, pretty pointless engaging except that if you can have a whole thread without him claiming a 'logical fallacy' you win a prize.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 10:42:45

tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 9314
Joined: July 4, 2002

Not irrelevant but perhaps troubling as it demonstrates that your perception includes what you see and in some cases, what you see over rides what what you hear.

That perception includes what you know as well and is why they remove all of those inputs when they test your hearing, there is no red light to show when the tone is present. In that case, they only want to know what you actually hear (perception limited to ones ears) and this approach also works for audio.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 11:14:56

tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 9314
Joined: July 4, 2002

Unless the "thing"causes an effect unique to you, others may be able to hear, taste, smell what ever it is.

If others also detect it, then it is possible to test this perception by seeing if other people actually detect it or just think they detect it.

Remember your "hearing" includes what you see and know as that Mcgurke video demonstrates, it's why a hearing test has no other clues, it's testing your hearing alone.

At the edge of perception the statistical odds can show a trend, for example if 600 out of 1000 listeners said X cables made a difference with out knowing when they were using lamp-cord and and exotica that means something.
But if you can't hear a system improvement without having it pointed out or seeing it.....

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 11:16:23
tomservo Manufacturer Posts: 9314 Joined: July 4, 2002	If the question had been, which of these was better a or b, then 600 does tell you something about preference.

Oh, suddenly i have to prove something? Shirley, you jest. Nt, posted on April 29, 2025 at 11:47:15
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

Weird. That's the real world you just described. Me topsy, you turvy. Nt, posted on April 29, 2025 at 11:50:08
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 12:58:23
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	That's kind of the whole point, that's it's universal. A couple vacates though, your system should be working properly. It doesn't have to be exceptional, it can be average. It just can be out of polarity, that sort of thing. And your hearing has to be be average or better. I don't follow trends, trends are for other people. But Good luck, as Bob Dylan says at the end of his records.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 13:02:59
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Well, you have to be able hear whether it's unchanged, or better, or worse, or a mixture. Some positive things have their downside. But I understand, everything is black and white with you guys.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 16:41:10
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	See, as it turns out my latest devices are very good candidates for several concepts including Extended Mind Thesis, action-at-a-distance, quantum teleportation, programmable matter, and mind matter interaction. So, I'm on board any interpretation of reality that includes one or more of those.

RE: But how do you prove something that is very subjective?, posted on April 29, 2025 at 19:24:11

Geoffkait
Manufacturer

Posts: 1236
Joined: July 2, 2024

"Does x make an improvement you can hear?"

That is a logical fallacy, here's why: because sometimes people can't hear any difference for many reasons not associated with the device under test. You know, things like the system has errors in it, the listener's hearing is not really as good as he believes it is, the test system isn't revealing enough, the tester didn't follow instructions. Whatever.

RE: JA says he bashes the chip because it has no plausible explanation., posted on April 30, 2025 at 08:12:51
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	No, I'm not still selling The Super Intelligent Chip, which was my product, it got replaced about a thousand years ago by New Dark Matter tray treatment, the quantum demagnetizer and my new CD spray, who knew polycarbonate has pores? But the original Intelligent Chip was not (repeat not) my product. See the irony?

One wonders if JA even knows the Intelligent Chip is not my product. Hmmmmm., posted on April 30, 2025 at 09:00:32
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

RE: To be honest, it only shows how easily fooled you are. Nt, posted on April 30, 2025 at 09:29:11
tomservo Manufacturer Posts: 9314 Joined: July 4, 2002	"it only shows how easily fooled you are." As long as customers / decision makers are also "fooled" when they listen , my job is done. I suppose if you design things, in sort of a parallel universe way, that's your job too

Nice, you're like the Catcher in the Rye for naive gullible audiophiles. Nt, posted on April 30, 2025 at 11:10:29
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

RE: Nice, you're like the Catcher in the Rye for naive gullible audiophiles. Nt, posted on April 30, 2025 at 17:59:33

tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 9314
Joined: July 4, 2002

Fwiw, my hobby has been home audio for most of my life and while i have always wanted to sell home living room market but we don't, i only design the stuff.

Hard for you to imagine but the others seem to think home audio has too much "snake oil" and folklore to put much effort into it so the focus is where it's easier and side by side listening is common.

DIY has always been a hobby and that is why i still post here and give advice occasionally.

While there are certainly critical listeners as customers, the smaller speaker were through the recording studio area. I wouldn't say any of them are more gullible or naive about their craft than any working professional and ALL are very familiar with what their instruments sound like first hand.
That is an advantage for us because they can hear the difference before you explain how it works, if they even ask how.

Do preferences really mean anything? I reckon probably not. Nt, posted on May 1, 2025 at 07:14:36
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

RE: Nice, you're like the Catcher in the Rye for naive gullible audiophiles. Nt, posted on May 1, 2025 at 15:32:03
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Seems like pretty standard comments on audio, but thanks anyway.

I always thought his products were a parody, posted on May 5, 2025 at 12:52:56
cmandantemarcos@hotmail.com Audiophile Posts: 129 Location: MS Joined: December 14, 2024	...I guess not.

RE: I always thought his products were a parody, posted on May 6, 2025 at 13:40:44
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Good thimking

Logical fallacy? There IS no objective, ALL is subjective as no one has all the facts, ergo skewed data = inc, posted on June 22, 2025 at 06:49:19
Cleantimestream Audiophile Posts: 7625 Location: Kentucky Joined: June 30, 2005	! The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.

What facts do nobody have? Nt, posted on July 6, 2025 at 10:09:54
Geoffkait Manufacturer Posts: 1236 Joined: July 2, 2024	Nt

Critic's Corner

Nice article by editor Jim Austin in Stereophile now. Mr. Chip 20 year anniversary. Bravo! Nt

172.56.3.168