Audio nonsense

Over the years, I have discovered that the most valuable tool in my toolchest is intellectual humility.

I've been dragged kicking and screaming  by friends and professional associates to audition gear that pegged the needle on my BS meter.  I found some of those concepts to be downright insulting and refused to expend a molecule of mental energy or one-minute of my precious time with someone else's fantasy.  After being shamed for months (or, years) into atleast sitting down for a couple of minutes, with a great degree of skepticism, my eyes (and, ears) were opened.  Me, and my system, are better for it.

I once had a customer walk in and ask for a "Paragraphic Frequalizer".  I'm pretty sure a case of Dyslexia was kicking in here.  But, if I ever came across a Paragraphic Frequalizer, it might be fun to mess around with in my spare time.

Have fun.

This post is targeted to the group I fondly refer to as "Bumble Bees".  You may recall the comment somewhere along the way that given what we know about science and math, an Aeronautical Engineer would have to conclude that Bumble Bees can't fly.  All the data suggests that there's not sufficient lifting force in those tiny wings to overcome the mass of the typical Bumble Bee.  

The problem is, of course, that we've all seen Bumble Bees fly.  This problem is compounded by the fact that when confronting the Aeronautical Engineer, we would handily loose the debate based on our limited knowledge of the technical aspects vs the guy/gal with a pretty strong pedigree in science.  However persistent and insistent we are that our observations (and those of others) are correct, the engineer remains unconvinced.  But, our level of confidence is at the 99.997% threshold in our observations.  Similar to to having a deer crash thru your windshield, embedding its carcass in your passenger's seat, then having your "really smart" neighbor try to convince you that there's no way it could have happened and you should go in for counciling.

So, charge on Bumble Bees!! Trying using some snake oil to lubricate those slide rules?  I heard it will get you to a (predefined) conclusion much faster.

@noske 

Earlier in the post I referred to intellectual humility, and how items and/or technology that I thought were bogus, when finally given a fair audition, took me by surprise and became solid performers in mine (and other) systems.  It seems that some fail to acknowledge that there may be a gap in their knowledge base and there may be something to learn.  Perhaps even from others.  This is all fine and good until they invalidate the reality and perception of others in the most stingent terms.  The absoluteness of their belief systems are a bit stunning at times.  Particularly when you see them mock and ridicule both the product and the consumer when those product categories have become wildly successful while offering extremely high performance/cost value to the end user in many cases.  The "Bumble Bee" ignores the observations of others and adheres to the disciplines that have served them well even when those disciplines betray the most basic simple real life obervations shared by a vast number of qualified participants.  Unfortunately, it does take the fun out of a hobby.  Especially amoung those who are very happy with their choices.

I'd also like to formally acknowedge the presence of "creative marketing" and existence of devices that are, for lack of a better word, fraudelent.  This forum may be a good source to flush out the pretenders from legitimate products.  I would feel more comfortable if we approach these in a case-by-case basis and invite the group to post comments, both positive and negative about their experiences with the items, rather than preclassify the item as "nonsense" before the discussion begins.

@mitch2 

Well done.  It appears that your "antenna" is very sensitive and your perceptions are right on.

@noske 

On the other hand, would you support the establishment of an independent regulatory outfit to govern the sale of all products associated with audio industry?  

I don't see this (or, any) forum as the gate-keepers of truth.  Nor do I see the need for a formal regulatory body to "protect" us.  I merely object to a "pile on" format where there is a implication of fraud to a product or products in the heading prior to an open discussion.  It brings out the worst in us.  A simple:  "Hey, this  <thing> is interesting.  What do you think?" may provide a venue for higher level discussions that could actually yield something of value.  

I enjoy this forum as an opportunity to share ideas across many venues with individuals with similar interests who quite often give me more than I give them.  So, yes, in my world, it is highly relevant.