• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Impact of AC Distortion & Noise on Audio Equipment

Let's not go overboard... is Bugatti a fraudulent company for selling vehicles to multi-millionaires that buy utterly unusable performance - both because they don't have the skills to extract it even if they went to tracks, and because the real world is a ridiculous place to even try?

We're talking "life style" here, pure audio jewelry. "I do it because it makes me feel good and I can". Many things in our world aren't rational, so if someone has the disposable income and doesn't know how to spend it... why not let them fund a few jobs in a company even when the value prop is questionable? We see it happening in high tech all the time. ;-)

I do believe equipment protection is sensible. That's all. The fancy filtering..? With Class D stuff it is verifiably nonsense to anyone that understands the principle, and many say it's actually detrimental. In any case, I don't think multi-thousand $ filtering aka conditioning equipment has ever provided a benefit to anyone.

In a nutshell: you'll never convince a passionate irrationalist with circuit design talk or measurements. You can just hope they'll sober up if they hear a negative impact on their music enjoyment... and if they don't, let them fund some employment with whatever their momentary fancy is. ;-) May be be space flight, may be whatever... let them spend. ;-)
 
Why not setup a complete system, and measure the noise at each output stage on each component. Preferably if possible parallel measurement. That the real world setup isn't it?
 
In continuation of this very interesting thread, I would like to ask if there are measurements available or / and experience for the Torus Power TOT Max toroidal isolation conditioning please.
 
In continuation of this very interesting thread, I would like to ask if there are measurements available or / and experience for the Torus Power TOT Max toroidal isolation conditioning please.
Check the review index there are various power conditioners that do nothing sonically. I suspect the Torus would be in the same boat.
 
There is well-established legal precedent in the U.S. that gives wide latitude to advertising speech. It enables companies to violate the spirit of truthfulness in pretty outrageous ways - the bar for holding them liable for false advertising or fraud is higher than most of us would think is right.
I notice your total lack of sources, look what I found just by googling.

"When the Federal Trade Commission finds a case of fraud perpetrated on consumers, the agency files actions in federal district court for immediate and permanent orders to stop scams; prevent fraudsters from perpetrating scams in the future; freeze their assets; and get compensation for victims."

"Testimonials, however, are not substantiation. The Commission rarely finds anecdotal evidence like this to be a sufficient basis to support a claim."
 
There is well-established legal precedent in the U.S. that gives wide latitude to advertising speech. It enables companies to violate the spirit of truthfulness in pretty outrageous ways - the bar for holding them liable for false advertising or fraud is higher than most of us would think is right.
In Canada it's pretty simple but most people are fully not aware of this. If a service or product are not being delivered as claimed then there is a breach. Full stop. I've gone to court 2 times for this and threatened court action and all times I have won.

A service or product not delivered as claimed is illegal.
 
Last edited:
I notice your total lack of sources, look what I found just by googling.

"When the Federal Trade Commission finds a case of fraud perpetrated on consumers, the agency files actions in federal district court for immediate and permanent orders to stop scams; prevent fraudsters from perpetrating scams in the future; freeze their assets; and get compensation for victims."

"Testimonials, however, are not substantiation. The Commission rarely finds anecdotal evidence like this to be a sufficient basis to support a claim."
Neither of these sources contradicts my point. My point was not that U.S. advertisers are allowed to deliberately mislead or peddle objective untruths. My point was about what the author of the 2nd link you provide mentions in passing as "subjective claims and puffery." These two techniques, along with very carefully worded objective claims and product/service descriptions, account for a very large proportion of dodgy advertising claims - claims that many of us would say are misleading or sketchy, but which are not technically false or deceptive.

My point was that, at least in the U.S., permitted advertising speech goes further into the realm of "misleading" than many of us would like or expect. That is not the same thing as saying that advertisers are allowed to actually lie or mislead.
 
Last edited:
Neither of these sources contradicts my point. My point was not that U.S. advertisers are allowed to deliberately mislead or peddle objective untruths. My point was about what the author of the 2nd link you provide mentions in passing as "subjective claims and puffery." These two techniques, along with very carefully worded objective claims and product/service descriptions, account for a very large proportion of dodgy advertising claims - claims that many of us would say are misleading or sketchy, but which are not technically false or deceptive.

My point was that, at least in the U.S., permitted advertising speech goes further into the realm of "misleading" than many of us would like or expect. That is not eh same thing as saying that advertisers are allowed to actually lie or mislead.
Wasn't fair to just quote you thanks to your explanation. The "false advertising or fraud" was thought by me to entail things like the following quote that was also written.

But they hear a difference, they can't help it if you don't. Hard to prove in court.
Hard to prove in court indeed, because the Dunning-Kruger effect doesn't even remotely provide evidence that the difference is real (hence the second source I provided).
 
Last edited:
Let's not go overboard... is Bugatti a fraudulent company for selling vehicles to multi-millionaires that buy utterly unusable performance - both because they don't have the skills to extract it even if they went to tracks, and because the real world is a ridiculous place to even try?
Inconsequential question, because Bugatti probably didn't make extreme marketing claims that resemble those audiophiles who seem to have gone off the deep end. Bugatti is a fraudulent company if it lies about the performance of its vehicles, but I doubt that this has happened.

Furthermore, you of course have a good point that buying such a vehicle is the same kind of vanity as extreme audiophools if it is not used often on race tracks.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't fair to just quote you thanks to your explanation. The "false advertising or fraud" was thought by me to entail things like the following quote that was also written.

Appreciate your reply, and no problem at all - all good, and thank you!
 
Back
Top Bottom