Do we believe in Machina Dynamics?

The dog keeps barking.

Thank you. This coming from you means a lot to me.

You guy need a dog or something, let it go man!

LOL, you mean spending $200 on a $1.99 clock to improve my sound will mean my head in not in the sand? Or how about $75 on a phone call to hear a 1980's modem? Or how about $160 for some rocks I can pick up for free next to the road? Man, you're sure are smart Norm ...

RE: My post above (about 10 up)

Don't know how well my point was understood, so let me rephrase. Sometimes the effect of an invention is immediately understood both experientially AND physiologically. Other times, it is only experienced at first, but the underlying mechanism is figured out years later.

In the case of MD products, it is premature to even discuss the alleged mechanism, because we've NEVER EVEN ESTABLISHED that any AUDIBLE EFFECT OCCURS in the first place. My complete disbelief in the "physics" of MD is pretty much irrelevant at this stage, until we honestly test the fundamental assumption that anyone can hear any improvement from a jar of rocks to begin with.

So those arguing about the underlying physics of MD-type products should really tend to first things first: Demonstrate whether or not one can reliably identify the effect from its sound alone.

Head in the sands idiots are everywhere.

+++ Paul, I am glad that you agree that further discussion is useless. +++

A somewhat bewildering statement to make by someone that started threads on the very same topic under another forum.

Regards, and mind you don’t cut your fingers when you slaughter the goat.
Paul

Paul, I am glad that you agree that further discussion is useless. Enjoy your freedom from fraud.

+++ If one hears something that improves ones sound, is it logical to say that you don't understand it and therefore it cannot be true? +++

Nope, and had I actually said as much I would have been wrong. Of course, eluding I had made comments that I didn’t to prove your point, is no less than outright lying and demonstrates lack of character on your behalf.

+++ if you don't try a product that others say works because you don't understand it, are you being rational +++

Second time in two sentences you are eluding to something other than the truth. I don’t blame you though; with a case as weak as yours, I’d be tempted to be deceitful too.

I reject MA products sight unseen because they lack any form of credibility and their offerings lie far outside what can be considered scientifically reasonable to have an effect on audio. I doubt that anybody with any engineering background or experience in electronics thinks otherwise.

MA as a company also has a track record of being fraudulent and I found numerous posts where their products have been exposed as vaporware.

I am happy to try any product if a reasonable explanation, backed by physics and/or research can be produced.

+++ The very basis of science is observations, in this case listening to reproduced music. If one hears a speaker sound far superior, why not buy it? +++

This comment has zero relevance to the topic and by no means contrary to even a single posting I have made on this bulletin board.

+++ Both he and you claim only to buy given a personal understanding of the basis for the component being superior or working at all +++

You come up with this comment after I said {and I quote myself verbatim} “I have yet to make a single purchase not based on sound factual basis”. Yet again, you demonstrate a high degree of deceit in a vain attempt to gain credibility. I have bought a number of things w/o personal understanding, but these items were always based on sound physics. Maybe you need to take an English language class?

+++ Frankly, I think such statements are ridiculous.+++

Yes, I think so too. You’re the one that made it and I am glad you recognize yourself as ridiculous. But then, spending $1000 on $5 dowel sticks does indicate a very irrational personality worthy of ridicule.

+++ I hope others can understand why I take such exception to those pronouncing that anything is a fraud because they personally cannot understand how it works.+++

Yes, in some cultures animals are sacrificed to bring on rains and good harvest. They also take great offense when the practice is exposed as fraud. I mistakenly assumed education would eliminate such ignorance but you have proven me wrong.

Regards
Paul

Okay, Pauly, let me try this again at a more sophomoric level.

"Lol. Let me repeat myself, 'Wow somebody that says {and I quote verbatim} “I am untroubled by not knowing how it works” is lecturing me' on science and logic.

"Pray tell us Norm, what is the logic and science in not wanting to understand?"

I never said anything about "not wanting to understand." If one hears something that improves ones sound, is it logical to say that you don't understand it and therefore it cannot be true? Even worse, if you don't try a product that others say works because you don't understand it, are you being rational or valuing the basic elements of the science to be receptive to new findings?

My position as always is that there is science involved in audio but mainly it is more applied engineering, which while explaining the basics, ignores many unknown phenomena. Engineering uses what we know to make things that work, but there are many improvements that could be made were our understanding better.

The very basis of science is observations, in this case listening to reproduced music. If one hears a speaker sound far superior, why not buy it? Science may ultimately explain why there is the improvement or others may reverse engineer it and use it themselves.

"Again, you are quite mistaken. (why am I not surprised?) I have yet to make a single purchase not based on sound factual basis."

I admit that I confused you with someone else who claimed the same position and also found the Adagio speakers to sound much better. Both he and you claim only to buy given a personal understanding of the basis for the component being superior or working at all. Frankly, I think such statements are ridiculous. No one really knows why some caps sound so much better and therefore are used in many components, no one knows how to make the best sounding speaker, wire, electronics. Many try their ideas and some have success.

I therefore believe that you are wrong that all of your purchases are made with full factual knowledge about why they are superior to others. Frankly, you evidence very little capacity to do this.

Don't pat yourself too much on the back or be so dismissive of others who realize that they don't know why something they like works, but buy it nevertheless. You may avoid a tweak or component that really does not work, but you may be missing something that others have found good that you too would enjoy. Who is the worse for this?

If you find all of this illogical, I am sorry for you, but hey everyone somehow gets by. I am none the worse nor none the better for spending time in our unconstructive discussions, but I hope others can understand why I take such exception to those pronouncing that anything is a fraud because they personally cannot understand how it works.

+++ I've no problem allowing for physical phenomena whose mechanism we've yet to understand and quantify.+++

Of course. However, we can apply a certain level of reason. If a tweak can effect, lets say vibration or acoustics, we can assume a high probability that it can work, especially if the company has a proven track record.

None of machina dynamics tweaks are even close to being plausible and I have read numerous posting of their tweaks being nothing other that scams. Surely at least one or two of their tweaks should be understood and accepted by the general audiophile public at large by now – but they're not.

The only proponents of MA are folks, who with without exception, claim that they do not understand how tweaks work in general. Out of total ignorance, they make no distinction between tweaks with reasonable chance of having sound factual basis and those that are totally w/o any level of reason.

Regards
Paul

$200 alarm clocks, $75 phone calls, $159 for a box of rocks, $400 for the cd upgrade box, $40 cd tray tape, $375 for the "Promethean" base (wich looks like a couple slabs of wood and bed springs), $40 intelligent chip cd upgrade and so on.....how come we dont see this guy on late night infomercials sandwiched between a Magic Bullet blender and a Male Enhancement syrum?
And why on earth would anyone be at all skeptical of pet rocks, phone calls and alarm clocks that cost a couple hundred bucks??????????????

+++ you are ignorant of both logic and what science has to say about anything+++

Lol. Let me repeat myself, 'Wow somebody that says {and I quote verbatim} “I am untroubled by not knowing how it works” is lecturing me' on science and logic.

Pray tell us Norm, what is the logic and science in not wanting to understand?

+++ You took offense that I noted on another thread that your having listened to the Adagios and bought them +++

I have no idea what an Adagios is. Again you seem to elude I am the same dummy you are. I am beginning to suspect that you have a problem dealing with people that are intellectually your superiors.

+++ suggested that you do not always value factual basis for making audio choices.+++

Again, you are quite mistaken. (why am I not surprised?) I have yet to make a single purchase not based on sound factual basis.

+++ You are not always an idiot apparently +++

I'm never the idiot Norm. Even the times I do something foolish, folks like yourself make me look like a genius.

+++ Live well and prosper! +++

Oh, I do live well and I am prosperous (within reason), mainly because I don't throw money away on snake oil and vapor-ware like you do. But thank you for the kind sentiments.

Regards
Paul

Jimmdavis, as you know that is my position.

How about a listener with less than perfect eyesight?

We need not waste our time debating the physics (or lack thereof) of MD products. I've no problem allowing for physical phenomena whose mechanism we've yet to understand and quantify.

So let's cut to the chase here: If MD products make a difference, a blind listener will be able to identify that difference. End of issue.

Pauly, as before there is no benefit in discussions with you as you are ignorant of both logic and what science has to say about anything. You took offense that I noted on another thread that your having listened to the Adagios and bought them suggested that you do not always value factual basis for making audio choices. You are not always an idiot apparently. Live well and prosper!

+++ So, Pauly, you will castigate me for saying when it comes to audio buying decisions that I don't care how it works, and then for not having scientific "facts?" +++

No, I castigate you for eluding I bask in the same ignorance you do. You’re the one that brought up scientific method, remember Norm?

I understand perfectly well why the “tweaks” I have in my system work and am happy to explain each and every one. I am equally comfortable explaining why some will not work.

+++ I am sure you feel confident that you are immune from con-artists despite your ignorance of science. +++

Yep, there you go again – on queue. Just how much did you pay for a couple of wooden sticks, which have zero factual nor any proven merit? $1000 right?

+++ LOL! +++

Amazing how that additional 21st chromosome you have makes you laugh even when you have been taken to the tune of $1000 for some $5 worth of wooden sticks. I would have been really angry at myself.

Regards
Paul

So, Pauly, you will castigate me for saying when it comes to audio buying decisions that I don't care how it works, and then for not having scientific "facts?" Damned if I do, and damned if I don't!

I have no obligation to provide you with what you call "facts" in your untrained lexicon of the scientific method.

I am sure you feel confident that you are immune from con-artists despite your ignorance of science. LOL!

Wow, somebody that says {and I quote verbatim} “I am untroubled by not knowing how it works” is lecturing me on scientific method.

+++ Please spare us your trite phrases and unscientifically based judgment without fact +++

LOL, without fact you say Norm? Pray tell me, what “facts” do you have? The ones you don’t know about?

I am still waiting to hear whether you know why power cables can improve sound. But I guess that is just one of the “facts” that you don’t have, isn’t it. I understand now why we have folks like Kait around … the temptation to fleece folks like you must be difficult to resist.

Regards
Paul

Paully, so once again I am right you haven't a clue about physical regularities or of the scientific methods. Please spare us your trite phrases and unscientifically based judgment without fact.

+++ I was a physics major, among other majors, in the 1960s +++

Good for you Norm, you have a bachelors degree. My secretary has an MBA.

+++ In reality, I doubt very much that you have any understanding of physics or the limitations on our knowledge of natural phenomena. +++

Yep, and Geoff K is so way ahead of me, I just don’t know what I am missing?

+++ Rejection of an observation +++

I have yet to reject the findings of observation even once in my life.

Two weeks I tested a SS, wooden and plastic outlet cover plates back to back. Observation = zero difference.

So far from being swept under the carpet, the so-called cover plate tweak is nothing other than crap.

+++ You, my dear sir, are a pseudo-scientist. +++

LOL, coming from somebody that spends $1K on holograms and supports Machina Dynamics, you must forgive me for not taking that comment seriously.

There’s an old saying Norm, a fool and his money is easily parted. Old Geoff parts you with your money with little trouble.

Regards
Paul

Pauly, I don't want to go through this once again with you. I was a physics major, among other majors, in the 1960s. Physics today is quite different than then. I read Scientific American and have several friends in the Physics department. In reality, I doubt very much that you have any understanding of physics or the limitations on our knowledge of natural phenomena.

If something that fails to be explained by our limited knowledge, it is a challenge to our theories and understanding. Rejection of an observation that is contrary to a theory is a challenge to the theory and not to be dismissed as an accident or to be swept under the carpet and ignored.

You, my dear sir, are a pseudo-scientist.

Regards,

Norm

+++ Their physics are no less sound than those behind most tweaks and cables and they have smarter guys coming up with product names. +++

LOL - a little clock or pebbles have the same factual basis for improving sound as a speaker cable? Okaaaay.

Norm, let rephrase correctly.

The critics' "physics" tends to be real physics, the "physics" of MD tends to be zero factual basis and believed only by the ignorant and gullible.

The ignorant have little problem believing MD (lack of) physics as they have no understanding of real physics. To them, sound tweaks like audio cable and total snake oil like pebbles seem to have the same factual basis. They are the individuals that folks like GK can exploit. You, Jim and a few other folks demonstrate a high degree of lack of understanding. Even now, you probably do not have a good understanding as to why some power cables may improve sound.

Once understanding of the physics behind tweaks is achieved, it is very easy to discriminate between what will work and what is placebo. There is no black magic in audio ... there never was, there never will be and the sure isn't any now.

The fact that you think that some aspects of physics is in some way out of date demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what science is about.

Regards
Paul

The critics' "physics" tends to be old and out-of-date and the "physics" of MD tends to be obscure.

Drew: With respect, their "physics" are widely regarded as a joke (or worse) and have been debunked all over the internet. Try a google search of any of Geoff Kait's "white papers" and you will see what i mean.

Their physics are no less sound than those behind most tweaks and cables and they have smarter guys coming up with product names.

Be certain to buy matching Timex clocks and matching orange price stickers so the study participants don't know which is Machina Dynamica product and which is not. Same with the jars of pebbles.

Same with the $30 "Tru-Tone" Duplex Covers that you could purchase at Home Depot for $5.97.

Same with the "Special Helical Springs" that you could order on the internet from a hardware supply house for under $10 (although, addmitedly, they might not be "special" -- at least in the way MD means it).

I imagine there are many who find some MD tweaks work and many who would never try them, and even a few who try them and find no benefit. One thing is certain on the MD tweaks as well as the Acoustic Revive tweaks, we get little inclining about why the work. Lacking this many will not try them, others will. There is no concensus nor anyone really available to convert to one position or the other. In short the discussion is a waste of time.

Nope. Next question...

All we are saying...is 'give peace a chance' Man

Not that I've tried it Audioblazer, but that Shakti Hallograph thingy strikes me as classic snake oil too -- something I say based solely on having seen it pictured and read the ad copy, which looks and sounds like unmitigated BS along the lines of Shun Mook "Spatial Control" disks and stands. Not that I doubt that anything which is a resonator and/or physically large enough will affect the soundfield to *some* degree when placed in the listening environment (the Shun Mook disks qualify as neither of those as far as I can tell), but that's also true of most all of one's listening room furnishings. What I doubt is that this particular object could always make the sound somehow "better" and be worth what's charged for it (however I don't doubt that paying a significant amount for these types of things could in some cases be key to their "effectiveness"). Then again, I haven't tried liquid on my CDs or silver paste on my connectors either...

Elizabeth, watch out for salmonella with those peanut butter jars!

>>Well the good thing is that they come in "mikro", "mini", "large" and "extra large<<

Yes but are they available ribbed, lubricated, and in different colors?

Tvad 20 years ago, if some come out with shakti hallograph soundfield would it be claim as snake oil? What about if somebody tell you fuse can improve dynamics of yr sound system? what abt put some liquid on the Cd. Abracadabra and the sound improve. Paint some silver stuff on yr connectors or tube pins, suddenly better resolution and lower noise floor in yr system. Believable or unbelieveable or snake oil? Today we know that the above products work. I dont have the opportunity to try Machina Dynamics in Malaysia. Therefore is fair for me to refrain from claiming that it is snake oil. Knowing whether a product works or not, its all abt listening to it right? So happy listening

Well the good thing is that they come in "mikro", "mini", "large" and "extra large". I'm thinking a person would have to be a fool to start out with the "Extra Large".

Or simply "caveat emptor"

>>In a democratic society like USA, there is such thing as Buyer Beware.<<

Or "reader beware" in your case.