 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
145.64.134.241
On March 20, 2005 Clark Johnsen wrote:"I'll bet you that within a year from now the mechanism behind the Intelligent Chip's effect on CDs will be understood and recognized..."
Let's make that 5 years, Clark. Geoff's explanation obviously doesn't count, for the many obvious reasons.Just found another explanation: the chip generates a "proton resonance field" which forces the protons to move simultaneously in the same direction (see pic). This movement eliminates phase distortion which has been generated during pressing of the disk. Judge yourself.
Klaus
Follow Ups:
What do protons have to do with it? They don'thave any polarity. They're nutral.I would think electrons in the valance band are the only conductors.
It sounds scientific. Just the same way machinadynamica's explanation sounds scientific.Before going and trying to explain a phenomenon one would think that that phenomenon had been shown (by hard evidence) to be real. In this particular case I can't see any evidence whatsoever. But I suppose that's how things go in audio.
Klaus
Klaus, I mean no disrespect, but do you have a learning disorder? You must be the only chip troll around who hasn't seen that "other explanation you just found." LOL~ Cheers
as
/
.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
nt
They're both the same dummy... when IW goes into full swing PH will wither and die on the vine. You can take that to the bank!
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
Without moderation at props to ward off people calling others stupid, for example, the vocal and uncivil non technical people will eventually badger and discourage any technical oriented people away.Cheers, John
Why, I oughtta... (grumble, grouse, gurbleflurb, other "g" words)
right up there with floobydust and googleplex..Cheers, John
nt
Gurbleflurb (noun) - the sound of someone excessively clearing their throat when irritated or embarrassed. The word "ahem" is a gurbleflurb.Gurbleflurb is now public domain- learn it, know it, use it! :)
Ahem.. (oops, I meant gurgleflurb..)Howzat?
Cheers, John
Just as I make up cable and amp differences - heh, heh! :)
You may have engaged in too much search-engine activity: there is no word 'googleplex'. You're probably thinking of 'googolplex'. What's the etymology of 'google' (or 'Google') anyway ?Jan
Remember the business about standing waves inside speaker enclosures?
Here this may help, your visit to Prop Head seeking guidance:http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=prophead&n=17906&highlight=standing+waves+KlausR.&r=&session=
And if you need more here's a post from CC that provided a link back to the original thread (where you made you unsubstantiated claim):
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=critics&n=22061&highlight=standing+waves+KlausR.&r=&session=
Anyway if unsubstantiated claims bother you so much I would think that providing resolution on your very own, if only just an admission that you were firing blanks, would be a logical start for dissuading the practice.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
And why go off topic?What up wit dat?? Dis a personal ting with Klause??
And MRI on monkeys under anesthesia?? What good is an MRI on brain function when the brain function is compromised by drugs???
If ya wanna get real results, you have to make the scanning coils track movement, and that's a b##ch..everything has to be made with G-10, and the super cannot be multiple strand due to self inductive effects which limit ramp rate..(I know, built one)..then, ya gotsta put targets on the heads, and link positional software to the scanning coils..a tangled web...
Hey there bjh...what happened with the wire I sent ya??Cheers, John
thread links I provided."And why go off topic?".
I explained that in my post.
"Hey there bjh...what happened with the wire I sent ya??"
Been lazy I'm afaid ... but I will get to it.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
I couldn't figure out what you called the unsub...claim..Nonetheless, it was off topic..
Lazy??get off yer arse and your keyboard, and go listen..:-)
Hey, I'm not gettin any younger.
Cheers, John
"" Flew in by miami beach BOAC...didn't get to sleep last night.. ""
In this (rather dramatically titled) post, Why are audio myths so difficult to eradicate? , KlausR. made a claim that he could not substantiate. Now you're supposed to be a bright fellow so I leave it to you go figure out the details but in any event KlausR. has acknowledged the lack of substantiation, for example when I asked him for an update he indicated he had contacted "... Blume and Peak Consult, but no answer yet", and also (as I have already said) he sought help over at Prop Head as well."Nonetheless, it was off topic.."
Again that was explained, in a nutshell KlausR. is on shaky ground if he wishes to start badgering people about unsubstantiated claims if he himself has a penchant for doing just that, get it? If the answer is no don't expect further comment from me since I have limited tolerance for entrertaining stupid people.
"...get off yer arse and your keyboard, and go listen..:-)
Hey, I'm not gettin any younger."
Yeah, yeah... and I only hope that the last admission isn't the explanation for the woeful lack of comprehension you've exhibited in this exchange.
:)
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
Do you mean to tell me, you did not read these, as provided by Klause..Noise control engineering 1979, Nov., p.112 : Van Nieuwland : Eigenmodes in non-rectangular reverberation rooms
JASA 1989, vol.85, p.772 : Milner : An investigation of the modal characteristics on nonrectangular reverberation rooms ""
Where there is sufficient, PEER REVIEWED substantiation?
So:
1. why do you consider these documents "unsubstantial"??
2. Why do you ignore the substantiation..is it just because you have a hard-on for klause?
I can easily understand the fact that english may not be your primary language, but civility also appears foreign to you.
Cheers, John
Examine the titles ...Noise control engineering 1979, Nov., p.112 : Van Nieuwland : Eigenmodes in non-rectangular reverberation rooms
JASA 1989, vol.85, p.772 : Milner : An investigation of the modal characteristics on nonrectangular reverberation rooms
The mistake KlausR. made was to generalize from in room observations to in speaker exclosure observations... and like I said he acknowledged as much.
Now I had enought of you... consider yourself ignored!
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
bjh" ""
The mistake KlausR. made was to generalize from in room observations to in speaker exclosure observations... and like I said he acknowledged as much.""You need to understand scaling laws. Once you learn how they are used and applied, then you may be able to discuss this topic (note, I said you may be able to).
Look up Reynolds number, Froud, similitude.. It's simple fluid dynamics. Airplane manu's use it, car manu's, even plumbers..(well, it's already done for them..but they use it).
bjh" ""
Now I had enought of you... consider yourself ignored!""I figured you could not discuss the topic..this is a typical reaction of yours when you are backed into a corner with no technical expertise to call upon.. my kids used to to that also..nah nah, can't hear you (covered ears)...
Cheers, John
Second "I" = "ignored".First "I", noun, five letters... good luck.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
Your behaviour is the poster child for sillyness.Cheers, John
.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
nt
I dunno if it's worth the effort but here goes:if one cannot transfer results obtained in non-rectangular rooms to non-rectangular speaker enclosures then, by the same logic, one cannot tranfer results from rectangular rooms to rectangular enclosures either. How then do you explain the fact that speaker designers are worried about standing waves in speaker enclosures?
Or do sound waves in speaker enclosures and rooms follow different laws? If so, then indicate those laws which are valid for sound waves in speaker enclosures?
Klaus
You made a claim that you couldn't backup. Now perhaps you can benefit from the hint provided by our friendly non-audiophile brainiac and see if applying scaling laws helps you with your problem, helps you to put substance behind your claim?
I really don't know, but then I admit my motivation to find out is low since *I* never made the unsubstantiated claim, *I* didn't go shooting my mouth off about "... audio myths so difficult to eradicate" ... *you* did!So why don't you thank Johnny for the lead and go get busy, try looking up "... Reynolds number, Froud, similitude.." and see if they can offer you something the Prop Head boys couldn't.
Speculation is cheap, substance is what you want ... especially if you're going to be badgering folks about their own unsubstantiated claims... off you go.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
The words Reynolds, scaling, Froud, similitude were so that you could look up what is being discussed. That way, you can understand the "substantiating claims" Klaus provided.Can't get there till ya learn, bjh..you made the claim that it was unsubstantiated, but that's because you didn't understand the technical aspects of the links provided...
Cheers, John
.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
You can tell him a cup of water weighs 8 ounces, but surely, you can't expect him to believe a pint weighs 16 ounces, now could ya..that would be an "unsubstantiated claim". After all, a pint is certainly not a cup.Cheers, John
nt
I sure wasn't.
d.b.
Neither was I, but maybe he's willing to accept my bet on a 5 years basis. Or 10 years, 20 years, just got a payrise, so today I'm generous:-)
Klaus
If you did make a bet, all you might get is a bag of chips. :)
d.b.
nt
nt.
I know that you knew I was gluten intolerant..so ya just hadta toss beer in my face..Man, I miss beer...and pizza.
Sigh..
Cheers, John
Oh Cheer up, I'm in the middle of quitting smoking after some thirty five years, and I'll be going for a colonoscopy next week. Just wait till you get to be my age punk!
d.b.
Mine's on Friday. Gives new meaning to "clean slate" and "sh***y day".Cytoscopy yesterday--Ouch!
Oh the joy of aging...:)
He posted it for entertainment.... Let's throw a stone at the IC/tweaks crowd, and see what happens....It's the exact same motivation behind Bose trolls.....
a
The explanation is obvious and scientifically uncontroversial.http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/505awsi/index1.html
Jim
It's a con.
If by that you mean that the device probably doesn't have any scientific basis, I am inclined to agree with you. However, what many fail to take into consideration is that the effect of something which operates via the "placebo effect" is every bit as real to the individual as something which operates via a non-psychological mechanism.Consider the following: Suppose you were not feeling well and went to your physician for a check-up. He or she examines you, diagnoses the problem and presecribes a medication. You take said medication and feel better. At some later date you learn that the medication was in fact a placebo. Do you call your physican and threaten a lawsuit for medical malpractice, or do you thank him or her for having the insight to utilize the placebo effect, thereby providing a side effect-free cure?
What is noteworthy (to me, at least) is that it is those who don't believe in the Intelligent Chip whose panties are in a knot, whereas those who hear sonic benefits froms its use are happy as clams.
Larry
You've just defined a con, which, in case you didn't know, is short for "confidence game."A "confidence game" is where the "mark" is persuaded to part with something of value (usually money) because he is led to believe that he's getting something of value in return, but, in reality, is not.
There is, in the United States and elsewhere, a well-developed jurisprudence of consumer fraud law which, in simple terms, requires an advertiser to be able to back up performance claims in an ad with objective data.
And, while it's nice, from the high perch of being a "reviewer" for some obscure Internet website, to look down with condescension at the people "whose panties are in a knot," about things like this, the fact is that a person's money spent on a con could have been spent, for example, on a piece of recorded music. Presumably, for most people, the playback of recorded music is, after all, the object of all of this hardware. Consequently, even you might agree that it's better for the hobby to keep those people in business (i.e. musicians and songwriters) than the people who make things like "Intelligent Chips."
How's it going Bruce?Glad to see someone is finally calling these "devices" what they really are.
his panties in a twist. Like Dan, actually.
...he's a con!clark
One of your better posts; here's to more like it.
d.b.
To be a con, the proponents would have to understand that the Chip does not work and continue to push their farrago of an explanation in spite of that knowledge. I'm not willing to give them that much credit.
that was certainly NOT the type of explanation what Clark was thinking of. Or was he???
Klaus
I try to keep an open mind reagarding new and unexplained phenomena, yet I also acknowledge the considerable power of suggestion (i.e, what is commonly, though not quite accurately, referred to as the placebo effect). While this may make me seen like a fence-sitter, it allows me to sleep at night. :)Larry Borden
I haven't seen milk spew out of someone's nose in years..Cheers, John
Hey; if you weren't lacotose intolerant along with the other "intolerances" you've got it might happen more often.
Gee, it's just so much fun getting older,
d.b.
Lactose intolerance is not gluten intolerance.Gluten intolerant people cannot eat most grains. 1% of the human race is gluten intolerant, 97% of those are undiagnosed. And it seems that the latest pet food recall is centering on the gluten that is put in..hmmmm.
Out:
wheat, rye, barley, oat...
Modified food starch (lots of candies)(there go the jellybeans)
Soy sauce (flour #2 ingredient) (so much for sushi)
Beer (oh the pain of it all) (while I may not live long, it will certainly feel like it :-()
Pasta
fake crabmeat (flour filler)
Vodka's (except potato vodka like chopin)
Meatloaf
Meatballs
fishsticks
breaded anything (goodbye chicken cutlets.)
croutons
many balsamic vinegars
many catsups
Macd's french fries (why oh why did they flour up the fries??)
Most gravies
Many soups (thickened with flour)Ah, the list seems endless..
db: ""
Gee, it's just so much fun getting older,""I prefer it to the alternative..
Cheers, John
What about the starch in your shirts?
Seriously; I don't envy you.
d.b.
db: ""
What about the starch in your shirts?""Honestly, I don't know. I've never tried to eat one of my shirts..I get my fiber elsewhere, apparently unlike you?? :-)
db: ""
Seriously; I don't envy you.""Yah, the beer and pizza were big hits..but life goes on..
As far as life, it's trivially small in comparison to all else that can or does happen to us.
Cheers, John
Are scientists still studying the Intelligent Chip when it has been replaced by the superior Intelligent Box/Intelligent Card? Seems like squandering tax payers money to me.
Although, were that witness placed on the stand, we wouldn't need the likes of Alan Shore to demolish him; the judge would summarily dismiss him for extreme lack of expert credentials.So who *are* the experts here? A short list of far more credible witnesses may take the stand: John Curl, Bobby Palkovic, Ken Kessler, Steve Harris (and five of his staff at HiFiNews), the late Bob Crump, inter alia , all on record as having very definitely heard the effect.
Add to that list all the gentlemen at CES who were reported (by myself) as having discerned it, not one of whom ever objected to my characterizations of their sincere reactions, and you have just this:
Blusterers in denial.
clark
I asked where that acceptable (technical) explanation is, two years after you were willing to place a bet that it would appear any time soon. Where is it, show us! I mean, one that holds water when being put to the test.Klaus
An acceptable (technical) explanation will never be available.I still can't figure out why my Fruity Pepples from the grocery store make my transistor radio sound like a mega buck vacuum tube system with floor standing speakers. I think I'll repackage the colorful cereal and sell them to "audiophiles".
...as they say. ;-)
...the explanation would "appear"? That would be frightfully stupid of the proprietors, who wish to sell the technology they discovered and understand.Finally, who are you to make such demands on others?
clark
The second part of yout sentence then was ...understood and recognized "by a public resistant to growth, a public enmeshed in the gears of accepted ways, a public subservient to whatever entrenched "scientific" bureaucracies tell them is absolutely, forever true. In short, people such as yourself."
Now tell me, Clark, how is that public supposed to be able to understand and recognize when the mechanism is kept a secret? How would you be able to win that bet of yours if no explanation is made public? Just wondering.
Klaus
if you, or your "expert witnesses", go and listen to Shepard's tone, does what you/they hear make it a really continously descending tone?If you, or your "expert witnesses", go and experience the Franssen illusion, does what you/they perceive make the speaker play that ACTUALLY DOES NOT PLAY ?
Klaus
nt
hehehe...
Let those that like them enjoy them. Let those that don't, don't.
"If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
- Will Rogers
These types of discussions will never die, luckily though the IW will be the place for them to resonate indefinately. The IW is a great idea!
"I always play jazz records backwards, they sound better that way"
-Thomas Edison
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
