2. misc-audio
  3. 166756-139155

Biggest audio hoaxes

Often when people discuss audio, they talk about "snake oil" or "hoaxes."

It's pretty typical to use the term hoax as a tactic against another who disagrees with one, or holds an unusual opinion or vouches for something which has not been verified. That's not what I mean by a "hoax." 

By "hoax" I mean an audio product or claim which has been pretty definitively disproved. Maybe not to everyone's satisfaction, but to common consensus.

So -- with that definition of hoax in mind, what are some of the biggest audiophile hoaxes you've heard of?
128x128hilde45

Showing 5 responses by djones51

djones51
4,947 posts
 
I've had speakers with Seas graphene drivers it wasn't used for electrical properties but a corrosion resistant strengthening coating on magnesium cones. 
djones51
4,947 posts
 
We need more than 16/44.1 , that blind testing is useless. 
djones51
4,947 posts
 
I agree, burn in the pretty crazy hoax. I've never noticed any component acquire  drastic change over certain prescribed time periods.
djones51
4,947 posts
 
As I mentioned earlier I think one of the worst hoaxes in audio has been the attacks and disinformation on ABX and Other forms of blind testing . In the scientific community it meets the level  of common consensus as part of the scientific method. Audiophiles act as if it's voodoo. 

Maybe not to everyone's satisfaction, but to common consensus.


djones51
4,947 posts
 
Not sure what to make of the video. He's showing vibrations when walking on concrete and tapping the speaker box. I didn't see how sensitive the measuring device was set. He talked about how if music was playing how bad the vibrations would be but for some reason didn't play any music to see how audible they are as he walked across the floor. I'd need more evidence and would try something cheaper or homemade first. 
More to discover