• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Mark Waldrep In Trouble AGAIN

andreasmaaan

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
1,525
Likes
837
Iy
Are people missing the central point, which is: it is a terrible thing to accuse someone of dishonesty, bad practice, etc. in the knowledge that the accusations can damage reputations and, who knows, somewhere down the line result in loss of livelihood or imprisonment..!

Although we all know that cables do not affect the sound, many people do not. It is entirely possible for a sales rep to fully believe what they are selling (i.e. deluding themselves) and this is no different from anyone selling any product. You can't just go around making accusations (with enough information in the accusation for people to work out who you're talking about) on the basis of a dodgy amateur measurement taken from under a chair in a crowded room or whatever.
It is a terrible thing to accuse an honest person of dishonesty ;)
 

Kal Rubinson

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
532
Likes
231
Location
NYC/CT
What passes for an objective acoustic measurement now seems to be an iPhone surreptitiously hidden under a coat while sitting in the audience for a demo.
First, it is objective if the conditions are correctly described (which I doubt you have done).
Second, it is more objective and quantitative than casual listening.
 

Kal Rubinson

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
532
Likes
231
Location
NYC/CT
Mr. Rubinson,

given your experience with power products it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on power chords and power cleaners.

On Audioqiest’s Niagara products you wrote:

«I love what the Niagara 5000s and 1000 and the rest of the AudioQuest kit have done for the sound of my system».

You indicated that the Audioquest kit of about $13.000 took away 3-4 dB worth of noise:

«One consequence of the lower system noise with the Niagaras is that my new normal listening level is 3–4dB lower than before».

Source: https://www.stereophile.com/content...designs-audioquest-page-2#HbQ76OCQrfqp1T0o.99
Touché ! I did write that but I have generally ascribed any audible changes to the fact that the new cable connections are cleaner and less-corroded than what they replace. What was done here was a replacement and reorganization of all the power cables in my system and the addition of a power filter/conditioner after which I re-measured system noise with a sound level meter at the speaker. Of all that equipment, I purchased only the Niagara 5000 and returned the rest.

I do not (afaik) ascribe any tonal changes to cables because I do not hear any and I decline to review interconnects and speaker cables.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,239
Likes
936
Location
UK
First, it is objective if the conditions are correctly described
Does describing measurement conditions make a measurement objective? The bar is set very low these days!

"When measuring the air temperature the thermometer may have been in sunlight - but it depends on whether shadows were being cast by the adjacent barbeque at the time. Using statistical techniques with a very high confidence level we have corrected for this."
 

Thomas savage

I’m the beautifulist
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,126
Likes
2,196
Location
uk, taunton
Chef pisses in the food. Customer catches this on his smart phone. Customer is a pariah? View attachment 13787 Get real.
Yea precisely, your to dinner with the restaurant club at a Michelin star place and you catch a video of the chef spitting in the consommé, instead of thanking you they round on you and kick you out of the club...

This guy was helping these people not get conned out of thousands of dollars but he got burnt at the steak for his troubles..., friends like theses man, friends like theses ....
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,239
Likes
936
Location
UK
Using an SPL meter makes it objective. Remember what "objective" means- it is NOT a synonym for "correct" or "verified" or "fully described."
I am aware of this, but a "description" itself is subjective. "Audience noise stayed at a constant level throughout the test and I held my microphone under the seat in front so that the organisers could not see it." does not make the measurement objective.

If a human's response to the music - or to other humans' response to the music (consciously or unconsciously bringing the microphone further out of concealment when the salesman' back is turned) can directly affect the measurement, the measurement can hardly be described as objective! The mere fact of the subjective response being laundered with a digital display or subsequent measurements in Audacity, does not remove the subjective stain.
 
Last edited:

SIY

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
810
Likes
800
Location
Chicago-Milwaukee axis
I am aware of this, but a "description" itself is subjective. "Audience noise stayed at a constant level throughout the test and I held my microphone under the seat in front so that the organisers could not see it." does not make the measurement objective.
"Objective." You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

BTW, what happened to the coat?
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,239
Likes
936
Location
UK
"Objective." You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

BTW, what happened to the coat?
You can be so literal! "Under a coat" was a figure of speech; a description of furtively fiddling around with a microphone in a way that might affect measurements.

OK, it's July. Let's say "Under a Hawaiian shirt". It's the same thing!!!

'Objective' versus 'subjective' means, in this case, removing any human emotions or feelings from the measurement - as far as possible. If the human is waving a microphone around in such a way that they could, for example, unconsciously alter the result in a way that confirms their prejudice, this is hardly an objective measurement. If other people's thoughts and feelings could also affect the measurement (a loud gasp when the $10,000* cable is plugged in registering on the meter/mic) then this also removes any claims to objectivity.

If this seems so difficult, I worry for the state of audio science!

* Oh no, it was a $14,000** cable. That must mean that my example is invalid.

** But I made that up. In fact it might have been $7003.58. So my previous * must also be invalid.
 

andreasmaaan

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
1,525
Likes
837
...and the idea that a measurement microphone can take "subjective" measurements!

EDIT: but I get your point @Cosmik: there were confounding variables that cast doubt the reliability of the objectively measured data.
 

Thomas savage

I’m the beautifulist
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,126
Likes
2,196
Location
uk, taunton
You can be so literal! "Under a coat" was a figure of speech; a description of furtively fiddling around with a microphone in a way that might affect measurements.

OK, it's July. Let's say "Under a Hawaiian shirt". It's the same thing!!!

'Objective' versus 'subjective' means, in this case, removing any human emotions or feelings from the measurement - as far as possible. If the human is waving a microphone around in such a way that they could, for example, unconsciously alter the result in a way that confirms their prejudice, this is hardly an objective measurement. If other people's thoughts and feelings could also affect the measurement (a loud gasp when the $10,000* cable is plugged in registering on the meter/mic) then this also removes any claims to objectivity.

If this seems so difficult, I worry for the state of audio science!

* Oh no, it was a $14,000** cable. That must mean that my example is invalid.

** But I made that up. In fact it might have been $7003.58. So my previous * must also be invalid.
Yea, all the waving about the mic and constantly belching and farting definitely could comprise the ‘measurement’..

Possibly this is also what scuppers @amirm results .., (hey) Jude dose not suffer wind like amir.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,239
Likes
936
Location
UK
Yes, it's something you invented. Like the "waving around" and "furtively fiddling" part.
Waldrep said:
I brought along a reference quality microphone and portable recording device which I kept out of view... As I looked to the right, another attendee was using the SPL meter app on his smartphone to do a less rigorous version of the same test! ...When I asked the other person measuring the SPL in the room, he concurred with me. “I saw about 2 dB difference,” he whispered.
 

SIY

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
810
Likes
800
Location
Chicago-Milwaukee axis
See? Quoting accurately is no harder than making stuff up. That's progress, which I applaud. And it's nice that you also noticed that someone else got the same result.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,239
Likes
936
Location
UK
See? Quoting accurately is no harder than making stuff up. That's progress, which I applaud. And it's nice that you also noticed that someone else got the same result.
If the point of having a discussion is merely to "quote accurately" then why have the discussion at all? Just post a link and close down the thread. That way there can be no inaccuracy.

But some of us actually enjoy discussing ideas and not just reproducing quotes. In this case, the idea is: should a person's reputation be impugned on the basis of a measurement made with a "reference quality microphone" "kept out of view" under a Hawaiian* shirt?

* Oh no, it was a grey sweatshirt. Or was it...? The whole discussion depends on knowing this fact. If we can't get it, because there are no quotes containing it that we can accurately quote, we just have to pack up.
 

SIY

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
810
Likes
800
Location
Chicago-Milwaukee axis
There's plenty to discuss without having to make things up.

In this case, a simple measurement made by a competent guy indicated cheating by a snake-oil peddler. Try as some might, that can't be rationalized away.
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
1,425
Likes
536
Ok, so here we have a competent recording engineer doing some ad-hoc measurements of SPL, and his finding is supported by an independent guy measuring by his phone.

I think this is as good as it gets to catch someone in the act.

Criticizing the recording engineer for not following established standards for science during his ad-hoc initiative is :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Thomas savage

I’m the beautifulist
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,126
Likes
2,196
Location
uk, taunton
If the point of having a discussion is merely to "quote accurately" then why have the discussion at all? Just post a link and close down the thread. That way there can be no inaccuracy.

But some of us actually enjoy discussing ideas and not just reproducing quotes. In this case, the idea is: should a person's reputation be impugned on the basis of a measurement made with a "reference quality microphone" "kept out of view" under a Hawaiian* shirt?

* Oh no, it was a grey sweatshirt. Or was it...? The whole discussion depends on knowing this fact. If we can't get it, because there are no quotes containing it that we can accurately quote, we just have to pack up.
I think mark was wearing a poncho, you can do all sorts under one of those without anyone noticing... I found this out when as a 21 year old I stepped into a San Francisco strip club one autumn afternoon and started up a conversation with a Mexican patron.

@SIY cosmik has likely been drinking since noon in eager anticipation of England’s semifinal game vs Croatia, he strikes me as that kind of guy ..
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom