More nonsense on Agon

[Vacceo]

This post in particular is beyond belief.

View attachment 295005

The relevant question here is asking what is the correct methodology, according to him.

 

[eddantes]

I take it all back! They have a patent!

US20130265704A1 - Housing for containing electronic components therein - Google Patents

A housing for containing at least an electronic component therein is provided. At least a tuning element is disposed in a wall of the housing at a predetermined location. The at least a tuning element forms an opening having a pilot aperture with a countersink aperture connected thereto. The...

patents.google.com

Why did they need the patent if as they say:

"….. but do not mistake the science of electrical signal as we know it–to be correct. Do not accept it as dogma, do not accept it as a substitute for the more base and true reality."

okokokok I'm done - I've hijacked this thread enough

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I take it all back! They have a patent!

US20130265704A1 - Housing for containing electronic components therein - Google Patents

A housing for containing at least an electronic component therein is provided. At least a tuning element is disposed in a wall of the housing at a predetermined location. The at least a tuning element forms an opening having a pilot aperture with a countersink aperture connected thereto. The...

patents.google.com

holy crap that patent doc! lol...what a bizarre array of bafflegab. "Acoustic Black Holes"

 

[fpitas]

holy crap that patent doc! lol...what a bizarre array of bafflegab.

A lot of patents are that way, unfortunately.

 

[ahofer]

In my opinion, there are few negative group descriptors that would be too low for Teo. He's the first to blow out all the cliches about how your ears/system/wallet aren't good enough, and how high end design is an art form and how they are smarter than Nobel Prize winners....

Liquid cables, 5-figure "break-in machines". They took the mercury substitute from modern thermometers (Galinstan) and made kilobuck cables out of it. I can't believe any forum even allows them.

 

[MattHooper]

But if someone sells snake oil ( and knows it is snake oil ) then he is a crook, if he doesn’t know then he is incompetent.
Keith

The problem is diagnosing whether someone actually knows they are selling "snake oil."

I've seen plenty of facile psychologizing from some on ASR - "he has access to the truth but disregards it so he's a liar!" - just like those on Agon - "those ASR guys are just jealous they can't afford the better equipment."

Many audio companies or audio stores are started by audiophiles, many of whom share some substantial overlap with the "subjective" audiophiles who buy their products. It's just as easy for a manufacturer to come to believe their snake oil works as it is for the audiophile, when they are both using the same fautly method of evaluating the results!

It's not that easy to get inside someone's head. And the problem is that someone who believes something you think to be crazy can be indistinguishable from the liar.
"He's been shown wrong by the arguments and evidence, but he keeps asserting the same claims, so he Must Be Lying."

No...people really can be mistaken, can have accepted some dubious assumptions that make them seem impervious to counter evidence/argument, and thus really believe what they say.

The term "lying" is thrown around so quickly these days it's disturbing. Social media like Twitter is a cess-pool partly because of this tendency, the constant calling of the other side "LIARS" when it's just a good old disagreement of views.

We so easily slip to the default of holding the other guy to be a liar because moralizing feels good to us. Calling someone merely "mistaken" doesn't have the same moralizing satisfaction. I think we need to be wary of this inclination. (BTW, it's been insinuated I'm a liar on this forum, and coincidently even in a philosophical on line discussion recently over reductionism vs emergentism the other fella felt he'd made such impervious arguments that he declared I must be lying to continue to disagree. It's frankly bizarre...)

So I generally agree with mglobe: best to take on the claims rather than psychoanalyze. And my default is to take someone's stated view on an audio subject as their belief, since trying to establish someone's "real beliefs" can often be in error and generally distracts from substantive discussion.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

 

[charleski]

Well, Audiogon’s ‘Tech Talk’ section is a veritable goldmine of critical information every audiophile should know:

 

[melvinjames]

How refreshing ..

 

[Gringoaudio1]

I don't follow that forum, but we have nonsense and poor behavior here too. It has nothing to do with the this site, or that site. It's human behavior on the internet. The $30k speaker search is a good example, where a handful of people (mostly 1 individual) destroyed what was an entertaining, informative, and based on the number of pages popular thread.

The end of MKR’s search for $30k speakers was unfortunate but inevitable as it was descending into audiophile nonsense and towards a Mickey Mouse vendor. If worry about replacement parts was a concern in choosing the Revel Salon2 then he forgot all about that criterion when tending towards choosing a garage builder. If my one post pushed him over the edge I apologize to all. The now deleted member certainly had some bold claims! Pretty thin-skinned to bug out on MKR’s part though. I was at one point curious to see which speakers he chose.

 

[mglobe]

The end of MKR’s search for $30k speakers was unfortunate but inevitable as it was descending into audiophile nonsense and towards a Mickey Mouse vendor. If worry about replacement parts was a concern in choosing the Revel Salon2 then he forgot all about that criterion when tending towards choosing a garage builder. If my one post pushed him over the edge I apologize to all. The now deleted member certainly had some bold claims! Pretty thin-skinned to bug out on MKR’s part though. I was at one point curious to see which speakers he chose.

Your opinions may or not be true WRT the vendor, and MKR's reasons may not make sense to you but that was no reason for people to be giving him a hard time. The deleted member's claims were way out of line (basically saying he set up a long thread just to pimp someone's product).

At the end of the day, the guy didn't owe us anything, didn't have to pick what we thought he should, and certainly didn't deserve to be accused of the level of dishonesty that the banned member was suggesting. If it were me, I would have walked away from the thread a lot sooner. Pity, as it was for quite a while it was an entertaining discussion.

 

[ahofer]

View attachment 295088

I saw Dan Ariely tell a story about one of his experiments. He would offer subjects dollars equal to the top or bottom of a cast die. The subject would silently choose top or bottom, then they would roll the die, then the subject would say which side they had chosen. In the basic experiment, people were..very lucky.

Then he introduced two variations:
1) They are attached to a lie detector
2) they are attached to a lie detector and the winnings go to charity

Results were more random in the first variation, and the deceipt tended to show up in the lie detector.

For the second variation, the results were even less likely, and the lie detector did not show deceipt.

So it would seem that if you tell yourself it's for a good cause, lying causes a lot less internal dissonance, or at least stress.

 

[Purité Audio]

The problem is diagnosing whether someone actually knows they are selling "snake oil."

I've seen plenty of facile psychologizing from some on ASR - "he has access to the truth but disregards it so he's a liar!" - just like those on Agon - "those ASR guys are just jealous they can't afford the better equipment."

Many audio companies or audio stores are started by audiophiles, many of whom share some substantial overlap with the "subjective" audiophiles who buy their products. It's just as easy for a manufacturer to come to believe their snake oil works as it is for the audiophile, when they are both using the same fautly method of evaluating the results!

It's not that easy to get inside someone's head. And the problem is that someone who believes something you think to be crazy can be indistinguishable from the liar.
"He's been shown wrong by the arguments and evidence, but he keeps asserting the same claims, so he Must Be Lying."

No...people really can be mistaken, can have accepted some dubious assumptions that make them seem impervious to counter evidence/argument, and thus really believe what they say.

The term "lying" is thrown around so quickly these days it's disturbing. Social media like Twitter is a cess-pool partly because of this tendency, the constant calling of the other side "LIARS" when it's just a good old disagreement of views.

We so easily slip to the default of holding the other guy to be a liar because moralizing feels good to us. Calling someone merely "mistaken" doesn't have the same moralizing satisfaction. I think we need to be wary of this inclination. (BTW, it's been insinuated I'm a liar on this forum, and coincidently even in a philosophical on line discussion recently over reductionism vs emergentism the other fella felt he'd made such impervious arguments that he declared I must be lying to continue to disagree. It's frankly bizarre...)

So I generally agree with mglobe: best to take on the claims rather than psychoanalyze. And my default is to take someone's stated view on an audio subject as their belief, since trying to establish someone's "real beliefs" can often be in error and generally distracts from substantive discussion.

Matt even a retailer can actually run an unsighted level matched comparison if they choose to, oddly none ( or very few) actually do.
Keith

 

[Doodski]

Matt even a retailer can actually run an unsighted level matched comparison if they choose to, oddly none ( or very few) actually do.
Keith

I used to get the customers involved and they like being involved in tests and research of the product(s). So I ran blind tests with them to show them speakers and of course that amps don't sound all that different than each other if within operating parameters. I've only seen one pair of customers refuse a blind test that where together and where veryy technical. One of them said it was wasting time and they just needed the specs to look at. So I gave them the specs and waited while they looked them over. I don't think I made that sale going from memory. Some technical customers never seem to be able to pull the trigger and purchase.

 

[MattHooper]

Matt even a retailer can actually run an unsighted level matched comparison if they choose to, oddly none ( or very few) actually do.
Keith

What percentage of their clientele go in expecting or asking for blind listening comparisons. I have never heard of a single audiophile asking for that.
(And if you could find an exception, the scarcity will prove the rule).

Doesn't make sense for a business to provide a service that nobody wants and which requires more effort.

More important, it's likely in most cases that the proprietor is of the belief such rigorous tests aren't required to hear sonic differences, just like his customers.

"Never attribute to malice...."

 

[melvinjames]

@amirm - once again you deserve a lot of credit for your restraint and cogent response(s) to the nastiness.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussi...nd-about-anything/post?postid=2577277#2577277

 

[Trell]

What percentage of their clientele go in expecting or asking for blind listening comparisons. I have never heard of a single audiophile asking for that.
(And if you could find an exception, the scarcity will prove the rule).

Doesn't make sense for a business to provide a service that nobody wants and which requires more effort.

More important, it's likely in most cases that the proprietor is of the belief such rigorous tests aren't required to hear sonic differences, just like his customers.

"Never attribute to malice...."

There is also this quote by Upton Sinclair (1878–1968):

>>>It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding<<<

Upton Sinclair

"Upton Sinclair" published on by Oxford University Press.

www.oxfordreference.com

 

[Purité Audio]

Matt not for the clients but for the actual retailer to determine if a product works or not, that’s what I did.

What percentage of their clientele go in expecting or asking for blind listening comparisons. I have never heard of a single audiophile asking for that.
(And if you could find an exception, the scarcity will prove the rule).

Doesn't make sense for a business to provide a service that nobody wants and which requires more effort.

More important, it's likely in most cases that the proprietor is of the belief such rigorous tests aren't required to hear sonic differences, just like his customers.

"Never attribute to malice...."

My point is that retailers could easily decide for themselves which component does and does not make an audible difference , simply by running unsighted level matched comparisons for themselves, but they don’t.
Keith

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

"He's been shown wrong by the arguments and evidence, but he keeps asserting the same claims, so he Must Be Lying."

No...people really can be mistaken, can have accepted some dubious assumptions that make them seem impervious to counter evidence/argument, and thus really believe what they say.

The term "lying" is thrown around so quickly these days it's disturbing. Social media like Twitter is a cess-pool partly because of this tendency, the constant calling of the other side "LIARS" when it's just a good old disagreement of views.

Considering we are talking about a field of objective science, can we really let people off the hook that easily?
One could say, if you market stuff, you have a position of certain responsibility.
You can no longer just rely on your own beliefs and preferences.
You have to make sure to give the people you are teaching/advising an as objective picture as humanly possible.
Naturally, none of us is completely free of bias, we're humans not robots but we should always strive to make an effort. Not everyone can has a deep understabnting like the big-shot scientists, so getting some finer details incorrect is okay.

When it comes to obviously bogus stuff like cables, cable risers, burn-in of digital equipment....

I don't think any honest soul could spew that marketing hogwash while keeping a straight face and least of all someone who is supposed to be invested into the hobby (and as such should have more technical knowledge than the average layman).

@amirm - once again you deserve a lot of credit for your restraint and cogent response(s) to the nastiness.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussi...nd-about-anything/post?postid=2577277#2577277

That's the industry professional speaking and it shows.

I certainly couldn't do it. I'm too emotional for that. :'D

 

[ahofer]

Couldn't help myself (wow the direct link copy doesn't work on the site)

Audiogon Discussion Forum

It’s easy to make snide remarks like “yes- I do the opposite of what he says.” And in some respects I agree, but if you do that, this is just going to ...

forum.audiogon.com

and for those who don't want to visit...

I've spent time here and at ASR since I got back into the hobby. I'll answer a little more broadly: I've learned a ton at ASR, not just from Amir, but people like Floyd Toole and JJ Johnson, both of whom participate there. ASR introduced me to a mountain of published research on audiology and audio engineering that served to fill me in on debates that started in my earlier audiophile phase (1980s). Those findings, and insistence on controlled evidence for claims, form the foundation of beliefs on which ASR folks debate. If you don't think that's the way to audio satisfaction, it's fine, but it doesn't make sense to go over to ASR, make unverifiable claims repeatedly and hope...something happens. I can certainly see how that ends in frustration and hot tempers.

Both places are rough on those who espouse the "wrong" views. If you suggest here that people do controlled, blind tests, you'll be jumped on. If you go to ASR and say "DACs sound wildly different because I heard it", they will jump on you. Each place has its ethos.

My own beliefs are that more companies should provide a proper suite of measurements. @amir_asr does that, with a lot of effort, and it has value. Much more value in that than a series of opinions about sound in different rooms with different recordings. Amir's klippel analysis of speakers, and the guidance on EQ available on the site, have made much more difference to my listening than endlessly swapping amps and DACs ever did. And yes, one of my systems has a raspberry pi running ROPIEEXL as a streamer to an RME ADI-2 DAC, feeding a Purifi-based amp. All ASR-endorsed solutions that I have enjoyed long-term and is anything but "sterile", IMO. I also bought a second-hand pair of Revel f228be speakers due to ASR, for a difficult room, and it was a fantastic solution. There are lots of ASR folks with similar stories.

Claims that "ASR only cares about measurements", that they "don't listen to music", and that the site is full of people disappointed in their sterile/unreliable gear are clearly false, and only serve to demonstrate someone hasn't bothered to look around the site. That just tells me they made up something that would sound plausible to partisans and ran with it. The longest thread on ASR is "what are you listening to now", and I've participated in discussions of 20th century music and jazz history there. I attend live performances about once a week on average, and several of my favorite participants on ASR are professional musicians and audio engineers.

When I was more active here, this place tolerated a few obvious snake-oil merchants, who tend to hang around and crap on people about how their equipment isn't resolving enough, they haven't been "in audio" long enough, how they don't understand the implications of quantum theory on audio (eyeroll), etc. It wasn't the whole experience, but I found that, in particular, extremely unpleasant, I also found the moderation haphazard at best. so this is my first post here in years, while I've been active at ASR since I found it.

It would be really interesting for representatives of the two sites to cooperate on some controlled testing to prove or disprove some of the claims not supported in the literature. But I mostly gave up on that happening ages ago.

Then I added this in another post.

There are an awful lot of assertions of poor measuring process in this thread. Perhaps an example or two with explanations would be useful? It's always better to debate specifics rather than make broad, unsubstantiated claims.

Even within the thread there, there are a lot of nasty personal broadsides and strong yet unsubstantiated claims. I'm not holding my breath for a response.