|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
208.58.2.83
...continually touts "human-caused global warming", reveals their scientific methods.clark
PS A subscriber for many years, I find it a well-written magazine except when it comes to hot-button issues, in which case they blatantly let their politics and prejudices influence the reporting.
Follow Ups:
" However, ...Hi-Fi News magazine has an article that states as cold hard fact: "All cables - yes all cables - have signal directionality... in one direction the sound is slightly louder, has lower distortion, is cleaner, smoother, sweeter, has deeper bass and overall wider dynamic range."And because New Scientist asks for some proof of these claims, they are allowing their political prejudices to color their stance? It would seem that, at the least, "slightly louder" and "lower distortion" are items that could be shown to be true or false by simply showing us the data. Yet, you seem to think that asking for proof of these claims is akin to political posturing.
You are one weird dude, Clark. And, clearly, not half so clever as you like to portray yourself.
Clark thinks he is sooooooooo clever ... that half as clever would not be so bad.Perhaps you meant one-third as clever?
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007
...!
And how exactly did I portray myself as "clever"? Where do you see me saying, "Clever Little Clark", huh? huh?Your own post contains several other errors as well:
"And because New Scientist asks for some proof of these claims..." No, they smugly smirked.
"You seem to think that asking for proof of these claims is akin to political posturing." No, I said that NS lets its politics and its *prejudices* color their columns; my example was clearly of the latter sort.
> > I said that NS lets its politics and its *prejudices* color their columns; my example was clearly of the latter sort. < <Well, I guess asking for evidence does show a prejudice of sorts.
You've determined that ALL wire (including wire grounded at both ends) is directional?"And because New Scientist asks for some proof of these claims... No, they smugly smirked."
Here on Earth most of us recognize the sentence below as a request for proof, which of course was denied by the claimant.
"Some of these parameters are scientifically measurable, so we tracked down the writer of the article, who also happens to be in the business of selling cables, and asked him if he could cite any statistically significant results of listening tests and electrical measurements."
"No, I said that NS lets its politics and its *prejudices* color their columns; my example was clearly of the latter sort."
Wow, what an astounding display of *prejudice*! How dare a publication for/about science ask for something resembling test results to prove claims. Surely a respected mag like New England Journal Of Medicine wouldn't be so prejudiced as to ask for test results proving the claims of a pharmaceutical company.
Again, Comedy Channel beckons.
I'd love to see how you turn that into a political stance.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
Position by magazine on cable testing verification is commendable and in keeping with "scientific methods".Published position on "global warming" is based on scientific measurements, study, and publication. Attitude is based on facts from "scientific methods".
Anyone can have another view. All of us harbor some views that are not based on scientific method-based facts. But it is only fair, that if anyone listens to us we should be willing to back it up with facts.
No matter who you are, you can believe what you want. If you are a leader, the bar is set higher. Truth and "facts" are the minimum!
Well written; possibly. Lightweight; definitely. Wrong on this one; certainly not.
Oh, oh! You are in for it now, Clark. Is it good to expose our design secrets on this website? They will only put it and us down, and then, years from now claim that they knew it all along! ;-)
x
Well. We gave the electrons in the middle of a cable a relative 60 deg. spin, so we could track them.
We put the cable on white noise and 100 watt, and no DC (using tansformers).
After one hour of running the test setup, the labeled electrons was still located at the same place in the cable where they were when the test started.
If you can hear a difference there must be something right with your imagination ... with the exception of wires where grounds are intended to be connected only one one side (if connected the opposite way, not following the instructions, there could be an audible difference).So I assume you will cancel your subscription as you are an "Old Scientist & WireNut" who should not stand for such unscientific audiophile bashing!
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007
...that "directional" cables had shields that were grounded on only one end. Depending on how the component's grounds are wired, that could indeed create an audible effect, no new theories required--though I've got some directional cables and I've never heard this effect.To some extent there's a clash of cultures here. Scientists in academia--the audience for this magazine--are used to the free exchange of data and ideas. Things are different in industry, whether it's hi fi cables or pharmaceuticals.
I'd say New Scientist embarassed itself here. I could be wrong about directional cables, however. I've never disassembled one.
Jim, if you follow the link it says"Hi-Fi News magazine has an article that states as cold hard fact: 'All cables - yes all cables - have signal directionality... in one direction the sound is slightly louder, has lower distortion, is cleaner, smoother, sweeter, has deeper bass and overall wider dynamic range.'"
So we're not just talking about the one-end grounding thing.
On the larger issue, I suspect the initial poster does not understand that NS is engaged in gentle mockery.
PS Connoisseurs of woo might enjoy this story
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/012504.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/02/texas_legislature_officially_i.phphttp://fixedearth.com/ certainly gives us a compelling alternative physics, and a conspiracy theory to boot. Copernicus, Darwin, Newton, they're all involved!
...understands mockery, and the Feedback column is full of it (as it were). The fact remains, however, that almost any phenomenon heard by high-end listeners is going to be mocked in NS and I suspect you know that.
> On the larger issue, I suspect the initial poster does not understand
> that NS is engaged in gentle mockery.Mockery most certainly but I would disagree with the gentle. The author does not even feel a need to explain anything assuming that the intended audience will see what is wrong. He certainly put forwards nothing to excuse the claims.
Applying the word respected to Hi-Fi News is a bit odd though. Apart from some audiophiles, I suspect Hi-Fi News lost the respect of the rest of mankind sometime in the 1ate 1970s when it adopted a "flat-earth" position on hi-fi equipment. Perhaps the author felt the word was necessary to justify the p*ss taking rather than simply ignoring nonsense from unreliable sources which is the normal position.
> > "Hi-Fi News magazine has an article that states as cold hard fact: 'All cables - yes all cables - have signal directionality... in one direction the sound is slightly louder, has lower distortion, is cleaner, smoother, sweeter, has deeper bass and overall wider dynamic range.'"So we're not just talking about the one-end grounding thing. < <
Um, well, okay. Those claims do seem a little...far-fetched.
EVERY respectable science magazine constantly "touts" global warming because almost every climate scientist who's not employed by an oil company believes that the evidence supports anthropogenic global warming. That doesn't make it true, but it does make me wonder what you, Clark, know that they don't.
NT
"... blatantly let their politics and prejudices influence the reporting. " Please support this statement.Their revelation of their scientific methods (my rephrasing): if you don't put up the data behind a claim, the claim is not worth much. What's wrong with that?
if the effect is as subtle as it sounds to me.Perhaps the problem here is the usual audiophile hyperbole applied to small effects.
...it may be considered important in this context.Incidentally I remember a well known designer of studio and sound reinforcement amplification visiting me. He was (is) very much of the "wire is wire" persuasion as are most people in that field. I demonstrated the effect of reversing a digital IC cable to him. His reaction? " Yes I can hear the difference but I won't admit to it".
The really bad news for cable DIY fans is that every bit of an audio cable may have a directional character: wires, insulation items, shields, damping items. It is a royal PITA to test these things.
That's why it's up to the individual to test for themeselves in their own environment....Something that scared, naysayers, around here fail to understand. That many historical scientific revelations start with the curious who say something akin to: "gee, that explanation doesn't sound right, let me test this for myself."
We live in unique environs, we like different types of music, we prefer different kinds of flavored sound playback devices, we hear differently.
No product will have the same level of efficacy with so many variables, no product can meet the unreasonable standards of "proof" that some unreasonable and intolerant "certainty freaks" here espouse....
Watching the reel as it comes to a close,
Brutally taking it's time,
People who change for no reason at all,
It's happening all of the time.
z
> > No product will have the same level of efficacy with so many variables < <We're talking about a wire. How many bloody variables can it have?
were you serious with your question? If not, I didn't get the joke........
Watching the reel as it comes to a close,
Brutally taking it's time,
People who change for no reason at all,
It's happening all of the time.
Are you saying that an ic or spkr. cable (ground at both ends or no ground) could be directional when used to connect one pre/amp or one amp/spkr. setup and not directional with other pres/amps/spkrs?
s
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: