theREALdotnet
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2022
- Messages
- 1,194
- Likes
- 2,062
The plumage don’t enter into it!
-
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!
Snake Oil Department, Top This
- Thread starter Ron Texas
- Start date
The plumage don’t enter into it!
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,288
- Likes
- 12,193
Apropos of the subject of snake oil, Positive Feedback has produced another article by Roger Skoff:
positive-feedback.com
Positive Feedback is in the "never met a tweak we didn't like" category. Roger Skoff often tries to produce defenses of tweaks, cables etc. often with the implication "I'm a technical guy, a manufacturer, so take my arguments seriously."
But some tweaks apparently go to far even for Roger! In that piece he uses the little discs some audiophiles place on gear to "improve performance" as an example of claims gone too far. Roger accounts on technical grounds just how dubious those claims are.
Meanwhile he starts off that very piece this way:
"As you probably know, I'm not just a writer and a long-time audiophile (I and my friends call ourselves "Hi-Fi Crazies"), but a manufacturer of High-End audio cables, originally XLO, now RSX.
As such, to some of our Hi-Fi brethren, that automatically makes me and anything I might say suspect. They insist—often based more on prejudicial "common sense" than on actual listening experience—that "wires is wires"; that the only things that can possibly affect the performance of a cable (or apparently any other electronic device) are Resistance, Capacitance, and Inductance ("R","C", and "L"); and that "High-End Cables" (cables said to allow for better system sound) and any number of other "tweaks" (things that are claimed to improve system performance but that may or may not defy "common sense"), are all just "snake oil and voodoo."
Actually, as the positive reviews of so many of such things have clearly shown, that's not necessarily the case: Some tweaks really do work and do exactly as they claim. There are others, though, whether part of our hobby or related to it, that fit quite nicely into the "Snake Oil and Voodoo" category."
In the comment section beneath the piece (under the moniker Vaal), I pointed out that basis on which he just claimed various high end cables and tweaks "work" is the very basis audiophiles think those little discs "work." So in fact he hasn't really separated his own claims from snake oil.
If interested you can see his reply to my comment in the link.
I also posted a second reply which, since they moderate comments, probably won't be posted:
Vaal (MattHooper):
---------
Roger you are leaping to wrong conclusions. You have immediately inferred that I'm an unreasoning dogmatist incapable of being swayed by logic or evidence.
I said I am not dogmatic about cables "not making an audible difference."
I only pointed out that when it comes to many claims made for expensive cables, the type of evidence put forth, that I have seen, has virtually always been anecdote. Precisely the type of anecdote used to justify every audiophile tweak, including the ones you yourself apparently reject! All that "techno-talk" you appealed to suggesting the implausibility of those little discs altering a sound system? The audiophiles who believe they work will simply reject it as your dogmatic adherence to theory over experience. "We can hear the difference, even if you are too dogmatic to accept it."
And this appears to be how you just reacted when I pointed out your saying "positive reviews have clearly shown" cables or some tweaks work. You appeal to "listening experience" over mere theory or "prejudicial common sense," right? Exactly what the believers in those "snake oil" discs are liable to apply to you. They had "listening experience" that had "clearly shown" the tweaks worked!
What you are inferring as dogmatism and close-mindedness, is merely someone noting these inconsistencies, and trying to be more consistent in approaching claims made in high end audio...as in any other realm of empirical claims.
People can fool themselves, right? I mean...that's surely what you are thinking when other people fall for things YOU take to be snake oil. And of course we know as a simple fact of experience, as well as through scientific study, all the ways people are biased and can fool themselves. It's strange that this most obvious of variables does not seem to show up in your critique....instead you talk about "scrupulous honesty" in vetting the claims, as if the only alternative is that someone is lying...rather than simply mistaken!
And note: I said nothing explicit or implied about your or anyone else's honesty, or dogmatic claims your cables do not 'work' as advertised. I only pointed out that, thus far, I haven't seen the evidence, for any high end cables I'm aware of, that the evidence is anything beyond multiple anecdotes, usually without controls for bias. If THAT is all one has, then unfortunately...those claims have not warranted being privileged beyond the same type of evidence presented for the snake oil tweaks!
Personally, if given a claim "This high end cable made an audible improvement over this cheaper cable" I would want to see: Objective evidence that suggests the cable is actually altering the signal...especially to a degree known to be audible. And/or listening tests controlling for known variables like expectation effects or other biases, which show repeatable results for identifying sonic differences.
Does that sound shockingly dogmatic? That is the very nature of our most epistemological responsible method of inquiry: Science! Which happens to be our strongest system of anti-dogmatism!
And if, for some reason, you'd want to wave away the relevance of vetting claims with that type of rigor, then...again...you'd be joining the club with all the other people pushing pseudo-science or dubious tweaks. "Science is great...but it can't detect MY THING."
Snake Oil and Voodoo: Roger Skoff Writes About the Stranger Aspects of Our Hobby
Snake Oil and Voodoo - Positive Feedback
Snake Oil and Voodoo: Roger Skoff Writes About the Stranger Aspects of Our Hobby
positive-feedback.com
Positive Feedback is in the "never met a tweak we didn't like" category. Roger Skoff often tries to produce defenses of tweaks, cables etc. often with the implication "I'm a technical guy, a manufacturer, so take my arguments seriously."
But some tweaks apparently go to far even for Roger! In that piece he uses the little discs some audiophiles place on gear to "improve performance" as an example of claims gone too far. Roger accounts on technical grounds just how dubious those claims are.
Meanwhile he starts off that very piece this way:
"As you probably know, I'm not just a writer and a long-time audiophile (I and my friends call ourselves "Hi-Fi Crazies"), but a manufacturer of High-End audio cables, originally XLO, now RSX.
As such, to some of our Hi-Fi brethren, that automatically makes me and anything I might say suspect. They insist—often based more on prejudicial "common sense" than on actual listening experience—that "wires is wires"; that the only things that can possibly affect the performance of a cable (or apparently any other electronic device) are Resistance, Capacitance, and Inductance ("R","C", and "L"); and that "High-End Cables" (cables said to allow for better system sound) and any number of other "tweaks" (things that are claimed to improve system performance but that may or may not defy "common sense"), are all just "snake oil and voodoo."
Actually, as the positive reviews of so many of such things have clearly shown, that's not necessarily the case: Some tweaks really do work and do exactly as they claim. There are others, though, whether part of our hobby or related to it, that fit quite nicely into the "Snake Oil and Voodoo" category."
In the comment section beneath the piece (under the moniker Vaal), I pointed out that basis on which he just claimed various high end cables and tweaks "work" is the very basis audiophiles think those little discs "work." So in fact he hasn't really separated his own claims from snake oil.
If interested you can see his reply to my comment in the link.
I also posted a second reply which, since they moderate comments, probably won't be posted:
Vaal (MattHooper):
---------
Roger you are leaping to wrong conclusions. You have immediately inferred that I'm an unreasoning dogmatist incapable of being swayed by logic or evidence.
I said I am not dogmatic about cables "not making an audible difference."
I only pointed out that when it comes to many claims made for expensive cables, the type of evidence put forth, that I have seen, has virtually always been anecdote. Precisely the type of anecdote used to justify every audiophile tweak, including the ones you yourself apparently reject! All that "techno-talk" you appealed to suggesting the implausibility of those little discs altering a sound system? The audiophiles who believe they work will simply reject it as your dogmatic adherence to theory over experience. "We can hear the difference, even if you are too dogmatic to accept it."
And this appears to be how you just reacted when I pointed out your saying "positive reviews have clearly shown" cables or some tweaks work. You appeal to "listening experience" over mere theory or "prejudicial common sense," right? Exactly what the believers in those "snake oil" discs are liable to apply to you. They had "listening experience" that had "clearly shown" the tweaks worked!
What you are inferring as dogmatism and close-mindedness, is merely someone noting these inconsistencies, and trying to be more consistent in approaching claims made in high end audio...as in any other realm of empirical claims.
People can fool themselves, right? I mean...that's surely what you are thinking when other people fall for things YOU take to be snake oil. And of course we know as a simple fact of experience, as well as through scientific study, all the ways people are biased and can fool themselves. It's strange that this most obvious of variables does not seem to show up in your critique....instead you talk about "scrupulous honesty" in vetting the claims, as if the only alternative is that someone is lying...rather than simply mistaken!
And note: I said nothing explicit or implied about your or anyone else's honesty, or dogmatic claims your cables do not 'work' as advertised. I only pointed out that, thus far, I haven't seen the evidence, for any high end cables I'm aware of, that the evidence is anything beyond multiple anecdotes, usually without controls for bias. If THAT is all one has, then unfortunately...those claims have not warranted being privileged beyond the same type of evidence presented for the snake oil tweaks!
Personally, if given a claim "This high end cable made an audible improvement over this cheaper cable" I would want to see: Objective evidence that suggests the cable is actually altering the signal...especially to a degree known to be audible. And/or listening tests controlling for known variables like expectation effects or other biases, which show repeatable results for identifying sonic differences.
Does that sound shockingly dogmatic? That is the very nature of our most epistemological responsible method of inquiry: Science! Which happens to be our strongest system of anti-dogmatism!
And if, for some reason, you'd want to wave away the relevance of vetting claims with that type of rigor, then...again...you'd be joining the club with all the other people pushing pseudo-science or dubious tweaks. "Science is great...but it can't detect MY THING."
I read that article yesterday and posted a comment regarding “blind testing, show they make a verifiable and noticeable audible improvement with independent studies and I’ll begin to accept“, needless to say my comment was not shown so I conclude that roger has disappeared far up his own arse. He gives the impression of a friendly old guy but he doesn’t take kindly to any questioning of his products.
Seems like Roger is still mulling over your 2nd reply.Apropos of the subject of snake oil, Positive Feedback has produced another article by Roger Skoff:
Snake Oil and Voodoo: Roger Skoff Writes About the Stranger Aspects of Our Hobby
Snake Oil and Voodoo - Positive Feedback
Snake Oil and Voodoo: Roger Skoff Writes About the Stranger Aspects of Our Hobby
Positive Feedback is in the "never met a tweak we didn't like" category. Roger Skoff often tries to produce defenses of tweaks, cables etc. often with the implication "I'm a technical guy, a manufacturer, so take my arguments seriously."
But some tweaks apparently go to far even for Roger! In that piece he uses the little discs some audiophiles place on gear to "improve performance" as an example of claims gone too far. Roger accounts on technical grounds just how dubious those claims are.
Meanwhile he starts off that very piece this way:
"As you probably know, I'm not just a writer and a long-time audiophile (I and my friends call ourselves "Hi-Fi Crazies"), but a manufacturer of High-End audio cables, originally XLO, now RSX.
As such, to some of our Hi-Fi brethren, that automatically makes me and anything I might say suspect. They insist—often based more on prejudicial "common sense" than on actual listening experience—that "wires is wires"; that the only things that can possibly affect the performance of a cable (or apparently any other electronic device) are Resistance, Capacitance, and Inductance ("R","C", and "L"); and that "High-End Cables" (cables said to allow for better system sound) and any number of other "tweaks" (things that are claimed to improve system performance but that may or may not defy "common sense"), are all just "snake oil and voodoo."
Actually, as the positive reviews of so many of such things have clearly shown, that's not necessarily the case: Some tweaks really do work and do exactly as they claim. There are others, though, whether part of our hobby or related to it, that fit quite nicely into the "Snake Oil and Voodoo" category."
In the comment section beneath the piece (under the moniker Vaal), I pointed out that basis on which he just claimed various high end cables and tweaks "work" is the very basis audiophiles think those little discs "work." So in fact he hasn't really separated his own claims from snake oil.
If interested you can see his reply to my comment in the link.
I also posted a second reply which, since they moderate comments, probably won't be posted:
Vaal (MattHooper):
---------
Roger you are leaping to wrong conclusions. You have immediately inferred that I'm an unreasoning dogmatist incapable of being swayed by logic or evidence.
I said I am not dogmatic about cables "not making an audible difference."
I only pointed out that when it comes to many claims made for expensive cables, the type of evidence put forth, that I have seen, has virtually always been anecdote. Precisely the type of anecdote used to justify every audiophile tweak, including the ones you yourself apparently reject! All that "techno-talk" you appealed to suggesting the implausibility of those little discs altering a sound system? The audiophiles who believe they work will simply reject it as your dogmatic adherence to theory over experience. "We can hear the difference, even if you are too dogmatic to accept it."
And this appears to be how you just reacted when I pointed out your saying "positive reviews have clearly shown" cables or some tweaks work. You appeal to "listening experience" over mere theory or "prejudicial common sense," right? Exactly what the believers in those "snake oil" discs are liable to apply to you. They had "listening experience" that had "clearly shown" the tweaks worked!
What you are inferring as dogmatism and close-mindedness, is merely someone noting these inconsistencies, and trying to be more consistent in approaching claims made in high end audio...as in any other realm of empirical claims.
People can fool themselves, right? I mean...that's surely what you are thinking when other people fall for things YOU take to be snake oil. And of course we know as a simple fact of experience, as well as through scientific study, all the ways people are biased and can fool themselves. It's strange that this most obvious of variables does not seem to show up in your critique....instead you talk about "scrupulous honesty" in vetting the claims, as if the only alternative is that someone is lying...rather than simply mistaken!
And note: I said nothing explicit or implied about your or anyone else's honesty, or dogmatic claims your cables do not 'work' as advertised. I only pointed out that, thus far, I haven't seen the evidence, for any high end cables I'm aware of, that the evidence is anything beyond multiple anecdotes, usually without controls for bias. If THAT is all one has, then unfortunately...those claims have not warranted being privileged beyond the same type of evidence presented for the snake oil tweaks!
Personally, if given a claim "This high end cable made an audible improvement over this cheaper cable" I would want to see: Objective evidence that suggests the cable is actually altering the signal...especially to a degree known to be audible. And/or listening tests controlling for known variables like expectation effects or other biases, which show repeatable results for identifying sonic differences.
Does that sound shockingly dogmatic? That is the very nature of our most epistemological responsible method of inquiry: Science! Which happens to be our strongest system of anti-dogmatism!
And if, for some reason, you'd want to wave away the relevance of vetting claims with that type of rigor, then...again...you'd be joining the club with all the other people pushing pseudo-science or dubious tweaks. "Science is great...but it can't detect MY THING."
Well, you guys are walking behind the flim-flam man pulling cash out of his pockets. No wonder he doesn't react well.
https://www.consumerombudsman.dk/media/14553/markedsfoeringsloven-lbkg-2013.pdf
Google Translate from a retailer that sells QED, Chord Company, Van den Hul, Atlas Cables, SUPRA Cables and Nordost products:
Højttalerkabler - Stort udvalg, køb her i metervis og sæt
Højttalerkabler til Hi-Fi og surround, både metervis og i sæt. Se et stort udvalg i en bred prisklasse, fra de bedste mærker. Køb online og få leveret gratis.
Analoge signalkabler til Hi-Fi
Stort udvalg af signalkabler til analog overførsel af lyd. I mange forskellige kvaliteter, priser, længder og konfigurationer.
Digitalkabler til USB, TosLink, SPDIF, LAN, XLR
Her finder du et udvalg af kabler til overførsel af digitale lydsignaler. Vi fører et udvalg i Toslink, S/Pdif og USB-kabler.
Strømkabler fra Supra - Hos Tape Connection
Strømkabler er ofte noget af det mest oversete i AV installationer og det er synd! - Et ordentligt strømkabel er godt skærmet og udført i høj kvalitet.
Strømrensere til Hi-Fi og AV-systemer
En strømrenser, eller strømskinne af god kvalitet, kan forbedre ydelsen i dit Hi-Fi-system betragteligt. Undgå uønsket, elektrisk støj fra el-nettet.
Last edited:
noiseangel
Active Member
C. Cook
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2021
- Messages
- 366
- Likes
- 185
Hoo boy, here we go. There's a whole Facebook page called Audio Bullshit or something like that dedicated mostly to this company. Wonder how long comments will remain open at YouTube. LOL
Nah, we roast all of 'em. Thed is a favorite, tho. He's reliably full of sh*it.
TAS and SR at the same time.....that's a tough combo to beat.
noiseangel
Active Member
What is a milking strategy in marketing?
Milking strategy is a short-term revenue generating strategy. This is a marketing tactic, which is deployed to snatch the largest possible revenue and profit from a particular product or service in the quickest period of time, regardless of the item’s future possibilities for generating revenue.noiseangel
Active Member
noiseangel
Active Member
noiseangel
Active Member
If these were medical devices these people would be gone and imprisoned.
They call that an “interview”? How about some critical questions?
Somebody get me a rope!
Suffolkhifinut
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2021
- Messages
- 1,224
- Likes
- 2,027
Would that be an audiophile rope or one bought from a hardware store? It does make a massive difference and the subjective effects on your wallet shouldn’t be ignored.Somebody get me a rope!
Suffolkhifinut
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2021
- Messages
- 1,224
- Likes
- 2,027
Don’t know I’m not that sort of boy.You mean one of these:
Similar threads
