The first official "Technical/Engineering" university was in Czechoslovakia and predates anything in Germany by a few generations and it is likely that future German ones modelled after the Czech one. Specific Military engineering academies with formalized curriculum opened as early as the late 1600’s in France. Prior to that formalized engineering concepts were taught to military "engineers" and architects (which lead to civil engineering). The word engineer dates back to the middle ages. Facts do matter.
I actually do talk to people at my local physics departments. Universities often can provide access to advanced test equipment at reasonable rates, and they are more than happy to participate in joint industry research to keep a grad student busy if it does not distract from their primary research. While the bleeding edge theoretical physics gets the media glory, much of the work is in more mundane areas. I am also fortunate to have the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in my backyard and often attend their public lectures as well as at the University of Toronto.
Almost invariably, what is at discussion is what happens at the smallest scales, the largest scales, or at the very extremes of speed, and how robust current models are for "regular" problems similar to how Newtonian mechanics is extremely accurate except when dealing with objects approaching the atomic scale, or very high speeds. Anything in audio would be a "regular" problem. To suggest that unknowns in the current models and understandings of physics are responsible for perceived sonic differences in some products amounts to "special pleading", especially when there is no evidence that any of these products illustrate properties not explained within the framework of standard models.
As well, conceptually, scientific "theories" are very robust and don’t equate to casual use of the word "theory". They have been rigourously developed and extensively tested, and the only thing often preventing them from being "fact" is the extreme rigour of proving they are correct in all cases. Those "theories" are responsible for all our fancy gadgets, the satellites in space, and any number of things more complex and rigourous than audiophilia. p.s. see #3: https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/
To understand how science works.. and not attack everyone with ’facts’. As facts are for engineering and this is exploration, the realm of science, which has no facts, only theory. The word fact is a common misconception of the nature of reality and has no place in science. (go ask the entire professorial staff at any university physics department)
We’ve really got to try and get past these ’kill all whom I disagree with in order to achieve MY peace’ undercurrents of projections that are masquerading as solutions --- that run rampant in humanity.
@teo_audio Not trying to be a kill all - It just seems a lot like someone pushing someone else's $10K power cord to augment their $10K power re-generator and convince us that it takes one to make the other sound good. Not all, but most designers and engineers who, for many years, have been building high quality amps and audio components, know quite well how to build a power supply. If you need, or think you need, a $10K power re-generator with a $10K power cord to make your $10K amp sound really good - you either need a different amp (one with a properly designed power supply) or you've got problems somewhere else....Jim
I think it might be his polite way of showing that he does not know everything, you don’t know everything, I don’t know everything and..most importantly...
I won't quote whole post but I really agree with you fully. Nice to see such posts here.
On the other hand, he has an irritating habit of saying, I have no idea how it works but work it does! There is no harm in taking a swing at the ball. He already stepped up to the plate, for crying out loud. Is it the fear of striking out? They’re his videos, that’s true, but sometimes he comes across as a little bit dottering.
The word engineer dates back to the middle ages. Facts do matter.
The word engineer does indeed go back that far. It was tied to the early bomb makers in the given military machine. The expression "hoisted by his own petard", for example, comes from the times that early bomb makers and/or engineers blew themselves up.
The formalization of teaching by rote and dogmatic text, as a method of giving these linear minded people something to do, outside of the military -- was the deal.
The Germans (more a regional reference than anything else) took it out of the military complex and applied to the the general public, in order to deal with all the areas of application that were not military in nature.
Which is the ’build out the world’ part of the origins of engineering. The world needed ’build out’ foot soldiers, who could follow directions. the kinds of people who could do this perfectly well but seemed to not be able to reach the theoretical exploration complexities. There was and is a large mass of them. Help them be useful to themselves and the world.
thus engineering is for following orders and following texts and not being theoretical in anything but following specific and rigid rules, theories are expressed as facts and laws.
And Geoff tried to remind you about this projection issue, re his reference to Feynman's line about 'cargo cult scientists', who were indulging in scientism, dogmatic factualization and law references.
And this forum is strongly intertwined with exploration... not dogmatic scientism, or 'engineering'.
There are plenty of other forums that are 'flat earth maintenance' forums in the context of audio - that serve that need.
Pointedly...some here are strongly indulging in dogmatic scientism. Starting with the basics that is in the texts and applying rigor and so on, is fine, but to rail against unknowns as they don't fit the things one read in the texts, is categorically against science and it's origins and intent.
and you hit this mark and walk this dogmatic projecting walk all the time, incessantly so...to the point of notable nausea for all others...
perhaps you should consider taking youself to one of those ceaselessly projecting flat earth forums, as you seem to fit so well with that mindset.
You put a lot of words down on paper, but alas, can’t back most of it up. You equate civil engineering and basic electrical engineering to all engineering disciplines, which shows a lack of your knowledge, not a lack of creativity on the part of engineers.
The few studies that have looked at intelligence versus course of study have put Electrical Engineers near the top of the list, far above general sciences, and matched only by those in the sciences at the university faculty level on average. There is also a correlation between higher intelligence and creativity, so your generalization that engineers, most of those in the audio industry being electrical engineers, not being creative in their approach and being "linear minded" has no basis in fact.
Very few of those who have a background in electrical engineering work on "life critical" things restricted by the bounds of "regulations", such as electrical power systems. Most work in unbounded rolls as problem solvers. If you think the average person with a "science" degree uses more creativity and non-linear thinking in their roles, you don’t have any evidence to support it. There is a reason why those with educational backgrounds in engineering are many of the most prolific inventors.
Your statements about "engineering" say more about you, than about engineering. You seem to have this deep seated hatred for the field. I suspect this has less to do with engineering, and more to do with engineers being the most likely people to call you out when you post things that are not supportable or factual. That is not because they are "linear" thinkers, but because they are capable of non-linear thinking which allows them to pull together diverse knowledge and apply it to new situations, real or imagined.
And contrary to your claims that this forum is "intertwined with exploration", that "exploration" is often akin, to use your analogy, to "finding the new world", and "proving the earth isn’t flat", when the rest of us have already moved on to trying to reach the stars. The lack of "questioning" or even a desire of basic understanding illustrated by a small but vocal group certainly illustrates my point.
And contrary to all your claims, science never says "trust me", but encourages deep understanding, verifiable experiments and measurements. It is not engineering that provides a basis for refuting the claims, of say, you and your cables, but science in general. Science would never simply accept your claims. Science would insist on proof, proof via measurement. Yet, you have no proof of any of your claims do you? If you did, you would gladly publish that proof. Don’t blame engineering for your lack of proof, blame scientific method for insisting on it.
p.s. No, not all others, but perhaps a loud minority. On the other hand, many appreciate that people like me are willing to call our questionable claims, and not just cower when attacked, usually incessantly.
and you hit this mark and walk this dogmatic projecting walk all the
time, incessantly so...to the point of notable nausea for all others...
Teo: “There are plenty of other forums that are 'flat earth maintenance' forums in the context of audio - that serve that need. ”
You don’t understand. He is here on purpose. Nothing to teach, and no one to “turn” on those forums you mentioned. Like a missionary, he goes where his religion is not spread yet. That’s what he is doing. On purpose. Plenty of “poor souls” he is targeting in these forums.
As for me attacking the inventive capacity of some in the engineering end of the pool, no, not at all ...that is your projection, a repeated error of yours. I said no such thing. Eg, Faraday was completely uneducated and self taught.
You seem to be spending an inordinate amount of your time and life energy to force this forum and it’s denizens to fit your mindset and projections about the nature of audio and exploration within it.
Your ideas on scientific rigor and how you apply it here, and against all in front of you.... on this forum....... are patently blind.
You are, by your own text and screed, IMO and IME... out of your depth
in many areas, and you can’t see it... or refuse to see it.
However, a good imagination and ability construct a model out of it is actually a very good thing for scientific exploration! You seem to be very good at this. one thing though (among many) is to no fool oneself with it. Admirable, commendable, in my book. But not in how you do it, here, on this forum. And I say this not with an aura or air of authority, no, no game, just communication of a observation that might be in the ball park.
In this crazy level of over the top posting frequency of posts (set to average 8000 posts in a year, if the average continues), posts with very specific directions and intent... you do the forum, it denizens..and audiogon as a company and endeavor...harm. Relentless, ceaseless, misinformed... harm.
This not an egoic game of one upsmanship. Just get over whatever it is you need to get over (your blind spot)... and move on. Thanks.
Actually you do attack engineering all the time. You seem to do it in most posts. Faraday was born in 1791. It was not uncommon for someone not to have a formal education at that time. What relevance does that have? He spent most of his life performing Formal scientific work, that he published for review by his peers. He used formal scientific methods, he made measurements. He did not simply makes claims and say "trust me".
Reading your posts, the point of them appears to be egoistic. Critically they lack substance most of the time, so other than to support your ego, why do you make them?
This is an interesting "claim" below. If I am "out of my depth", then why are people like you unable to specifically point out where my statements are wrong and use anything but "you are wrong" when doing it, never backing it up with anything meeting a respectable standard of "information" or "proof". One of the few who argued with relevant information curiously enough, at the time grouped me in with thyname, uberwalz, etc.
You are out of your depth in many areas, and you can’t see it... or refuse to see it.
Who cares how many posts I make. It is my time. I can choose how I make use of it. Given the lack of anything useful in many of your posts, why do you post at all? What service do you think you perform here by arguing with me, while not providing any evidence to support the claims of your products?
Atdavid Ethan: But you never teach anything! You just slam whatever anyone else posts as snake oil. You refuse to even post your current setup, for some stupid “insurance” excuses.
So let’s get started, first thing first: what speakers do you have? I am eager to learn from the “pros”
You said you work in the industry as a consultant. What do you exactly consult on? And you consult individuals or businesses? Just a slight disclosure as to who you exactly are here would help.
And one last point w.r.t. "out of my depth". If I am out of my depth, then why do you, and others attack --- Me ---, not the things I say, but --- Me ---. If the things I said and say were so clearly wrong, you would clearly and concisely address the things I say that are wrong. You don't though. You attack me.
And see, here is thyname, clearly illustrating my posts.
1) I never call something "snake oil". I state, very clearly, why I think a claim is false and where appropriate will expand (even offering verifiable information or links to things supporting my claims).
2) The rest of your post is nothing but both a "call to authority", a "strawman" and an "ad hominem". As opposed to addressing what I say, you attempt to attack me, claim to win an argument by stating something irrelevant, and attempt to claim authority because you have spent a fair amount of money on equipment (that you have placed into a far from ideal room).
thynameOP490 posts11-28-2019 11:05amAtdavid
Ethan: But you never teach anything! You just slam whatever anyone else
posts as snake oil. You refuse to even post your current setup, for
some stupid “insurance” excuses.
So let’s get started, first thing first: what speakers do you have? I am eager to learn from the “pros”
Tell me: why my room is a shoe box? Like you insulted me before. Do you know its dimensions? You can only see one picture I have there. And why do you think I am attacking you? I have asked you a legitimate question. Several times. Let’s try again:
What is your current audio system?. first thing first: what speakers do you have? I am eager to learn from the “pros”
You said you work in the industry as a consultant. What do you exactly consult on? And you consult individuals or businesses? Just a slight disclosure as to who you exactly are here would help.
You clearly have no interest in learning from me, and what speakers I have would only tell you my personal preference, not what you like, so almost meaningless, but you keep fishing. Let me know if your line breaks or your hook gets snagged. And ... whatever speakers I have, is meaningless to any of the discussions I have participated in or the comments I have posted. Similarly, what or who I consult too has little meaning.
You can either refute/argue with the content of my statements or you can't. Who I am, what I am, what equipment I own, is totally meaningless. However, if you are so curious, I think if you go through all my posts, there may be some hints about my room. Caution though, as has been told to me, I make a lot of posts :-)
The only thing you have mentioned is how you spent $ 8-10K for your room. Whatever that means, as you obviously have no pictures or details to back this claim up 🤭
Let’s try this again, without going over your personal details:
What is your ideal audio setup? Speakers, amplification, DACs,.,, the whole chain?
Instead of telling people what NOT to do, and “... state, very clearly, why I think a claim is false and where appropriate will expand (even offering verifiable information or links to things supporting my claims)”” —- to quote you —— wouldn’t it be more helpful for people you seek to teach to tell them what to do? Legitimate question.
If you spent time in threads that were not just tweaks, you would know that I don’t just say "don’t do that". But again, and --- Y O U ---- still do not understand this. Either address what I post, or don’t, but I am not going to entertain attacks on me, or meaningless attempted calls to authority, or straw-mans.
And you specifically I have no interest in dealing with, just like I had 0 interest in dealing with you on FB. You creep me out.
If you were not so lazy and narrow in your reading on here, you would know (and should know) that I have views that are both contrary to and agree with the divisive sides on here.
+++atdavid Interesting that those on this forum who have a professional history of working in the scientific/engineering/physics field; those who work or have a long history of working in the engineering/mixing/producing end of making music; those who have a history of building electrical components and have the knowledge and understanding of how they actually work - are the ones continually ridiculed here, when they question someones outlandish, unfound claims of grander, especially when attached to an even more outlandish price tag. IMO - good electronics are not an imaginative art form, they are products of sound engineering and development - adhering to established and proven principles of science and physics, backed up and proven both in the lab and in the studio......Jim
As one of those who has to make things work, and spent time at some of the most respected R&D orgs in the world, i'll say only this: 1. "makes a difference" does not mean better, nor consistently the same2. When i poo-poo some tweeks (and to be fair that includes most very costly cables) - it has to be in the context of "benefit for money". Otherwise spend the same money elsewhere and get more benefit. In closing when we argue "science vs perception" I'll quote someone vastly more accomplished than me, Daniel Von Reclinghausen, Chief Engineer of HH Scott way back when, who said: ""If it measures good
and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you've
measured the wrong thing." Amen. We don't know what we don't know - but we ought to try to learn it! be thankful that we can all enjoy music and this hobby, and remember its all for enjoyment. G
jhills +++atdavid Interesting that those on this forum who have a professional history of working in the scientific/engineering/physics field; those who work or have a long history of working in the engineering/mixing/producing end of making music; those who have a history of building electrical components and have the knowledge and understanding of how they actually work - are the ones continually ridiculed here, when they question someones outlandish, unfound claims of grander, especially when attached to an even more outlandish price tag.
@jhills, "Interesting that those on this forum who have a professional history of working in the scientific/engineering/physics field; those who work or have a long history of working in the engineering/mixing/producing end of making music; those who have a history of building electrical components and have the knowledge and understanding of how they actually work - are the ones continually ridiculed here, when they question someones outlandish, unfound claims of grander, especially when attached to an even more outlandish price tag."
I suspect the driving force behind most of the derision is a purely financial one.
The problem for those with any vested financial motives engaging in a public forum must be how to resist the temptation of endorsing their own products.
It must be far too easy for them to view any debate as a regular means of free advertising in what is a notorious dog eat dog industry where fortunes often rise and fall on factors little to do with quality.
The last thing they seem to want is an accepted consensus (as you might see in the world of Pro Audio). Hence the endless avoidance of measurement and data combined with endless attempts at obfuscation. All this with both eyes glued on their balance sheets. Impressive stuff!
Ask yourself why else would those running a business devote so much time of their precious time regularly posting online here and elsewhere? Are their motives entirely altruistic? Really? Aw bless!
Perhaps also their regular customers might ponder why so many respected manufacturers (Kef, B&W, Harbeth, Magnepan, PMC, Tannoy, Rega, Sony, JBL, ATC, Technics, Creek, NAD etc) never engage in any public debate about products.
They might only speak up on those rare occasions they feel the need to correct some misinformation regarding one of their own products.
Paul Darwin of Rega is particularly good in this respect of being informative online without crossing into morally dubious self-promotion. It really speaks volumes for Rega that they have achieved so much success with so little promotion.
Nah, he’s not brave(Mcgowan), he simply doesn’t care what people think anymore. You don’t like hearing about cable performance? Fine, then don’t listen to it, or read it in this forum.
The people that respond with disagreement are not going to change a thing. Why do you bother? I’ll tell you why, because you can’t handle the idea that you may be wrong. Time to put on the big boy pants and realize that you aren’t all knowing, and neither is anyone else.
Live and let live. Enjoy the hobby instead of trying to mark out your territory. Be willing to experiment once in a while. Life is too short to get upset about what a stranger posted on the internet.
CD 318 "The last thing they seem to want is an accepted consensus (as you might see in the world of Pro Audio). Hence the endless avoidance of measurement"
1. Re: consensus It is possible that the science behind audio is more mature than other areas of science such as medicine, physics, etc but the history of science is filled with consensus which later turned out to be spectacularly wrong and today’s consensus could be tomorrow’s
"no actually the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth."
I would recommend humility when discussing anything in science as what you know may be wrong tomorrow..
2. RE: measurement Old truism: "Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence". Meaning just because you can’t measure it (or have proof that something exists) does not mean it ain’t real. This doesn’t mean there aren’t people selling worthless stuff, it just means you can’t say it is worthless just because there are no measurements.
3. Unrelated to what CD318 said, but worth keeping in mind:
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.
Meaning in real life all kinds of things happen that you may not have thought of, or that can't be explained by current theory..
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
