Good-day Madman,
Speaking as a member of a small research, development and manufacturer that participates in the audio industry, I find your theories and claims on third-party testing to be ‘ridiculous rubbish’. I personally was extremely hesitant to post to this thread, but since you appear to be on a quest to do damage here, I feel the need to voice an opinion, as well as provide the public some additional information from industry experience.
Neutral laboratory testing is the only way to make available unbiased evidence that the technical approach and science dedicated to the product is functional, hence meeting the goals of the engineers, designers, investors, et all involved with the product and/or technology.
In High-End Audio, the cost of third-party testing is extremely expensive. First and foremost, a company must go to lengths to locate and hire the optimum engineer who has the responsibility of establishing the testing methodology and performance validation criterion. Fortunately, in our case, we have a Doctorate in Engineering as a member of our company whose primary focus is developing and/or instituting the necessary design and direction of testing, which is generally targeted to increase the knowledge and understanding of the technology being applied.
Therefore, anyone who spends the financial capital required for third-party testing for the sole purpose of marketing propaganda, in hopes of providing the public a small measure of supporting evidence that their science is of technical merit, is just plain ‘nuts’! That company could easily take those investment dollars and develop a strategic sales and marketing campaign, toss up a few charts and graphs on their website to reinforce their claims, and sell more products, versus a limited posting of third-party testing results to their website.
Add to that, the cost and time involved with selecting and hiring the specialized laboratory. Then there’s researching and qualifying the information about the facility, reviewing history of the lab, identifying test equipment, confirming calibration dates for the test equipment and, in some categories of audio, the lab personnel must provide extensive documentation on the acoustic environment used to support the test; and the list goes on and on.
Our corporate goal involving third-party testing is to make sure the technology is on track in order to expand the science of which we are committed to and believe in.
Laboratories, like all business, have their own reputation of which to build and grow on. I personally have never heard of a lab cheating the test results just to appease their clients. Obviously, you sir, may have never attempted to acquire, been involved with, or have ever paid out of pocket for third-party research.
Badman, did you ever review a detailed lab report on a breakthrough discovery based on a new-found technology? It would take a good engineer at least a week on the first pass through; chemistry reports on all the materials, corporate and engineering reviews, compiling of all the data that again, must be re-analyzed to assist in verifying and proving the results, which, of course, always leads to more variables and more unanswered questions.
My guess is this test was performed to prove Rick Schultz and his company were onto something new, heading in the right direction, and to verify the evolution and functionality of Magnetic Conduction Technology leading to their Patents and “Not to sell products”.
Whether you agree or disagree on the actual testing methods employed, your argument is based on your knowledge and/or opinion. Since obvious hostilities still exist, and before time is invested proving whether you may or may not be aware of newer testing methods or procedures, I have a couple of questions for you.
Are you, or do you, work for a business competitor? Do you have the educational and/or professional background, and if so, what type and in which career? Since you are calling out a brother, claiming fraud (the highest of all crimes in audio), and nobody knows exactly who you are, why not provide us with more information about you?
It is no secret that Mr. Schultz is a long time friend. We have shared technical information, partnered in a few innovations and occasionally discuss general business within the Audio Industry. In my opinion, he chose to use a well known University to conduct the testing and posted a very small portion of the overall test results to their web site.
I am confident that there is a great deal of information that has not been disclosed for public consumption, which would indicate that you do not have all the details required to fully understand the methodology leading to the end result.
In closing I might add that Rick Schultz is also one heck of an educated sales person who does not need to resort to any illegitimate practices or bogus marketing techniques in order to earn a living. If you really desire to see the testing parameters with a full disclosure, I would first pick up the phone and simply speak to Rick, or a representative of his company, and NOT disparage his name and/or attempt to discredit the Company on a well read public forum.
If you have a grievance or objection with me for expressing my opinion here, you are more than welcome to pick up the telephone and call me, as meaningful conversations are always welcome.
Very truly yours,
Robert Maicks
Star Sound Technologies, LLC
Speaking as a member of a small research, development and manufacturer that participates in the audio industry, I find your theories and claims on third-party testing to be ‘ridiculous rubbish’. I personally was extremely hesitant to post to this thread, but since you appear to be on a quest to do damage here, I feel the need to voice an opinion, as well as provide the public some additional information from industry experience.
Neutral laboratory testing is the only way to make available unbiased evidence that the technical approach and science dedicated to the product is functional, hence meeting the goals of the engineers, designers, investors, et all involved with the product and/or technology.
In High-End Audio, the cost of third-party testing is extremely expensive. First and foremost, a company must go to lengths to locate and hire the optimum engineer who has the responsibility of establishing the testing methodology and performance validation criterion. Fortunately, in our case, we have a Doctorate in Engineering as a member of our company whose primary focus is developing and/or instituting the necessary design and direction of testing, which is generally targeted to increase the knowledge and understanding of the technology being applied.
Therefore, anyone who spends the financial capital required for third-party testing for the sole purpose of marketing propaganda, in hopes of providing the public a small measure of supporting evidence that their science is of technical merit, is just plain ‘nuts’! That company could easily take those investment dollars and develop a strategic sales and marketing campaign, toss up a few charts and graphs on their website to reinforce their claims, and sell more products, versus a limited posting of third-party testing results to their website.
Add to that, the cost and time involved with selecting and hiring the specialized laboratory. Then there’s researching and qualifying the information about the facility, reviewing history of the lab, identifying test equipment, confirming calibration dates for the test equipment and, in some categories of audio, the lab personnel must provide extensive documentation on the acoustic environment used to support the test; and the list goes on and on.
Our corporate goal involving third-party testing is to make sure the technology is on track in order to expand the science of which we are committed to and believe in.
Laboratories, like all business, have their own reputation of which to build and grow on. I personally have never heard of a lab cheating the test results just to appease their clients. Obviously, you sir, may have never attempted to acquire, been involved with, or have ever paid out of pocket for third-party research.
Badman, did you ever review a detailed lab report on a breakthrough discovery based on a new-found technology? It would take a good engineer at least a week on the first pass through; chemistry reports on all the materials, corporate and engineering reviews, compiling of all the data that again, must be re-analyzed to assist in verifying and proving the results, which, of course, always leads to more variables and more unanswered questions.
My guess is this test was performed to prove Rick Schultz and his company were onto something new, heading in the right direction, and to verify the evolution and functionality of Magnetic Conduction Technology leading to their Patents and “Not to sell products”.
Whether you agree or disagree on the actual testing methods employed, your argument is based on your knowledge and/or opinion. Since obvious hostilities still exist, and before time is invested proving whether you may or may not be aware of newer testing methods or procedures, I have a couple of questions for you.
Are you, or do you, work for a business competitor? Do you have the educational and/or professional background, and if so, what type and in which career? Since you are calling out a brother, claiming fraud (the highest of all crimes in audio), and nobody knows exactly who you are, why not provide us with more information about you?
It is no secret that Mr. Schultz is a long time friend. We have shared technical information, partnered in a few innovations and occasionally discuss general business within the Audio Industry. In my opinion, he chose to use a well known University to conduct the testing and posted a very small portion of the overall test results to their web site.
I am confident that there is a great deal of information that has not been disclosed for public consumption, which would indicate that you do not have all the details required to fully understand the methodology leading to the end result.
In closing I might add that Rick Schultz is also one heck of an educated sales person who does not need to resort to any illegitimate practices or bogus marketing techniques in order to earn a living. If you really desire to see the testing parameters with a full disclosure, I would first pick up the phone and simply speak to Rick, or a representative of his company, and NOT disparage his name and/or attempt to discredit the Company on a well read public forum.
If you have a grievance or objection with me for expressing my opinion here, you are more than welcome to pick up the telephone and call me, as meaningful conversations are always welcome.
Very truly yours,
Robert Maicks
Star Sound Technologies, LLC