@jmcgrogan2 , you've given me a new idea . . . I think that I might start writing a "scam of the week" based on what appears to be the most ridiculous snake oil being sold on AudioGullible that week! :)
@jond, you raise a very good point. It does have 3 pounds of brass and 9 carat gold plating. And let's not forget the "lignum vitae" wood -- the most dense wood from South America! Here is what some knucklehead reviewer (Norm Luttberg) stated in "Stereo Times" 2014 Most Wanted Components: "I have not heard anything that rivals it." I'm willing to bet good old Norm didn't pay for it either! |
for @ebm , "A legendary Shun Mook product now being made in a very, very limited number. This record clamp is made from extremely rare pieces of dried ebony briar. This extra heavy century old ebony root which were immersed in the swamps of Africa has a unique power that no other wood possesses. . . . Thus when the musical energy produced by any Hi Fi system will excite to different degree of all materials within the space covered by the acoustic spectrum. Different materials will have a positive or negative effect on each other influencing the final music production. The secret is to control and tame such resonance to the advantage of the system. It is commonly known that many musical instruments uses Mpingo and other ebony wood to create the most natural musical tones and harmonics. Just like the clarinet, the violin and other wind and string instruments uses the ebony as the essential component to generate the sound. With many years of research and development we at Shun Mook have designed and brought forth several revolutionary devices in the technique of electronic audio enhancement."
I’m not sure what the price of a record clamp made from "extremely rare pieces of dried ebony briar" is but once again, I call BS. Now don’t get me wrong, I love a record clamp as much as the next guy that still uses a turntable -- I have a record clamp even. The point really is not whether a record clamp makes a difference, but whether someone can justify a $3600 (used) record clamp by cloaking it in so much nonsense. "A fool and his money are soon parted," as the saying goes, and as @ahendler points out, why not spend $3600 for a used brass record clamp with 9 carat plated gold if you’re blowing $725K on a stereo. OK, fair enough, why not light your cigars with $100 bills? Because it is stupid to do so, regardless of whether you can afford to light cigars with $100 bills. Just because you can blow money, doesn’t mean you should buy snake oil.
Now, if it doubled as a pepper mill, or maybe a weird nanny cam, or the wife could wear it as a pendent, it would make sense. If you could combine the "unique power that no other wood possesses" from the Shun Mook clamp with the 3 pounds of gold-plated brass of the Dalby, you might really have a winner!
@swampwalker, LOL! "The "ebony bullet chambers" will come in handy when your significant other finds the Visa bill and threatens to put a cap in your a$$!" You still let your wife see what you spend on stereo equipment? |
@don_c55 , you're right. There are probably silly priced cables, fuses, whatever, that can be viewed as a rip-off. And if someone was marketing the Dalby D7 Vinyl Stabilizer as the most bitchin' nicest looking record clamp that money could buy, hey, its your money . . live it up. But its the idiotic claims that are made to justify the ridiculous price that burn my nuts. "sweeter high frequency extension while the mid and lower registers are beautifully controlled. The soundscape is wider, higher and deeper, allowing the music to breathe more naturally . . .?" Come on. Just say that you will be the envy of all of your neighbors and fellow audiophools with an amazing 9 carat gold plated piece of brass and "lignum vitae" because no one has ever seen such a hot looking record clamp, without the ridiculous claims targeted to the gullible. You want to sell a diamond-encrusted record clamp because its, well, a diamond-encrusted record clamp . . . fine. You want to sell a diamond-encrusted record clamp because it makes "the music breathe more naturally . . ." different story. |
I actually started this thread marveling at the combination of the audacity of the claims made by the people selling the snake oil, coupled with the gullibility of those willing to accept those claims and actually buy something based on them!
I haven't heard of the magical cryogenically frozen power strip -- which of course sounds so darn amazing, you'd think you were listening to a completely new sound system. I'm sure its backed by all kinds of glowing reviews about how the freezing process realigns the molecules in one direction which of course facilitates a more pure transmission of power. I may look into that for next week's Scam of the Week, LOL!
|
@czarivey , I live in South Beach, sometimes shop at that Epicure, and you're right about some of those prices .. . unbelievable!
@mapman , your comments about gullibility and good value are certainly true. What I object to are the ridiculous marketing claims made to justify outlandish prices and are targeted to the audiophile. Like I said, if someone wants a diamond-encrusted record clamp, power to 'em. But don't claim that the diamonds resonate at a special frequency that cancels out the negative electrons emanating from the cartridge, which makes the music sound like its being played in the living room. If we didn't gobble up those types of marketing hypes, they probably wouldn't be made. But you can only sell snake oil with silly claims, or else no one would buy it,
I'd bet that in a true double-blind study, where the reviewer cannot see whether a regular record clamp is being used or the Dalby D7, he wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
|
@mapman, I'm not sure that we'll ever be able to sort out all of the nonsense. The reason is simple -- I and most people don't have access to some of the egregious snake oil like the $5800 (new) Dalby D7 to be able to run it through a double-blind test. I can only say that logically, the claims are seriously overblown to justify a ridiculously expensive product.
|
GON is not a policeman of crazy stuff on here. But It just galls me that anyone would fall for this type of exaggerated tweak on such ridiculous claims. I would hope that people on here, even the $10K cable people, get some common sense on this type of nonsense.
What is this Tice Clock that people have referred to? Not familiar with that load of do-do . ..
|
@geoffkait , you are not suggesting that a double-blind study, which is the gold standard of valid research, would not be appropriate to expose the charlatans, are you? The placebo effect and the power of expectation are both powerful factors when dealing with subjective things like the way something sounds. It would be the easiest and most reliable way to expose real nonsense like the Dalby D7 compared to my Music Hall record clamp if the listener could not know which one he was listening to.
On a minor scale, I have seen this in action myself. I love Pink Floyd's Dark Side of The Moon. There are several versions of it out, from the original "holy grail" in 1983 to the Sony Gold Mastersound, to the remaster to the 2011 remix. One enterprising fellow posted cuts from each, identified only by A-F. I figured that I would likely go for the brand new remix or the Holy Grail. Nope. Not knowing which was which, I though that the Sony Mastermind was the best. Surprised at the results, and now knowing which letter corresponded to which clip, Guess what? The 2011 remaster sounded the best. Goes to show that the double-blind is the benchmark of exposing charlatan claims. And I'm willing to bet that the overblown nonsensical claims made by the seller of the Dalby D7 will be exposed for the BS I believe them to be. |
So many questions, so little time, LOL!
@tostadosunidos , I sense a DSOTM fan .. . . :) The "holy grail" of DSOTM refers to the 1983 Japanese 1st pressing of DSOTM (matrix CP35-3017 on the CD itself) and also referred to as the "Black Triangle" version. It was the first CD pressing of DSOTM from the master and is not only very rare (in real CD form) but reputed to be the best sounding recording. However, as I indicated above, In the Steve Hoffman music forum, you can see the blind listening clips and results. The differences are not huge between the many versions, but I preferred the Sony Mastersound version. PM me if you want a copy.
@geoffkait , I respectfully disagree. It's not extrapolating one data point, which even then is subjective. It is discarding all of the nonsense reviews by "reviewers" and owners, and rely on tests that cannot be colored by preconceived expectations. I am not saying that all participants in a double-blind listen will have the same conclusion, but they should. So to me its not throwing out all of the other data as much as recognizing that some reviewer raving about how a record clamp makes all the difference in the world is BS. This data points should be discarded. Now, in a double-blind study, someone legitimately reached the same result, don't you agree that that would have significantly more validity? Plus, the witches' dunking chairs were supposed to be objectively verifiable tests. You float, you're a witch. You sink, their bad. . . guess you weren't a witch! Based on a faulty premise, sure, but still objectively verifiable. :)
@agear , I peruse AudioGon all the time. I am always surprised at some the enormously priced cables, interconnects and equipment. However, I do know that cables sound different, and equipment sounds different -- maybe not $20K better than a $1K cable, but who knows. But sometimes, claims are made which literally leap out at me and cry for comment because of the claims vs. cost vs the product. If the Dalby was $700 or $1000, I wouldn't have blinked. But $5600 US for a record clamp with the overblown claims in the ad . . . As I said before, enough is enough. I'm not sure if you were joking about friends having them and "swearing by them," but it again proves my point that once you're committed to a purchase, it becomes fabulous and you buy into the claims. But in a double-blind test . .. Highly different result, I suspect.
@magnum44 , LOL! I have all of my LPs digitized and on a server. My LP's are in storage, for that day when first editions of various LP's in mint condition become too valuable to not sell! Not on point for this snake oil thread, but I wonder if you take a high quality rig, put an LP on and digitize it into a lossless format, shouldn't the "warm analog sound" be captured into the digital file? |
@geoffkait , "Something tells me the only ones who are hot to trot to conduct double blind tests are the ones who’ve already made their minds up, you know, the died in wool skeptics. Skeptics claim these outlandish audiophile gadgets can’t pass a double blind test but never do you see a skeptic actually conduct a double blind test. What’s up with that? Isn't that putting the cart before the goat?"
I disagree and agree. I disagree that the only ones advocating double-blind tests are ones who've already made up their minds. Although in this particular situation, I definitely have some preconceived notions, I would love to do a double-blind test, because the whole point is to come up with a result uncolored by expectations. However, I agree with you that it makes no sense for a reviewer not to conduct a double-blind test. If you have access to a $5600 record clamp, there is no reason not to test it against, for example, my MMF Music Hall record clamp, unless you want to make exaggerated claims unhampered by reality. I would willingly do such a test if I had a Dalby. In fact I have done double-blind tests with speaker cables, interconnects, power amps and preamps, and the results have been very interesting. I see no reason why people would resist that kind of test and I think it should be part of every reviewer's repertoire. I saw an interesting ad today for a $25,800 (new) preamplifier. The ad stated "We have compared it to many that are far more expensive" and it "always wins." First, how many preamps are "far more expensive" than $25,800, and how did they judge which one "won." I'm not saying that the preamp isn't the best preamp since the invention of the transistor, but how about an objective study before proclaiming that it "always wins." That is putting the cart before the goat, I think . . . :) |
@agear , my music system is currently Focal Diablo Utopia III’s, a Plinius SA100mk III upgraded and reconditioned power amp, a Plinius M12 upgraded and reconditioned pre, and a Naim NDX to stream music (FLAC or DSD, as available) from my server to the Plinius. I don't think that I have fallen for any snake oil charms yet, at least that I can recall, although I do remember some somewhat expansive claims about one HT pre/pro being "so much better" than my old one, but I didn't notice much of a difference, at least in sound quality. Do MIT speaker cables count? I was using a pair of Cardas Golden Cross cables, and replaced them with MIT 3.3's. Although the whole "poles of articulation" that MIT uses to market its cables smells of BS, and I'm not sure if there is any bona fide technical evidence of that concept, I definitely heard a difference and liked how they sounded with the Diablo Utopias better than the Cardas, although I was not "blown away" by the improvement.
@geoffkait , LOL! |
@tomcy6 , so true! Pull the blindfolds out and see what reviewers say about a product! That would be embarrassing indeed! The key is that they don't know whether they are listening to the super duper best thing since sliced bread or the same $20,000 "old technology" trash that they drooled and fawned over last year. I'd love to see that!
|
@geoffkait , hysterical! :) |
@almarg , "The real question, though, would be whether differences could be distinguished between this $6800 weight and another 3+ pound weight having similar contact area and costing say $50 or so."
You are exactly right. The question is not whether a 3 pound weight makes a difference . . . Its whether a $5800 brass and "lignum vitae" weight makes a worthwhile difference over a 3 pound $50 brass weight. I find it highly doubtful. |
@geoffkait , I think you are off base on this one. Speakers first . . . Obviously speakers are complex interrelationships between components, crossovers, etc. Knocking one off is not necessarily impossible but more difficult than a brass weight, or a record clamp. The brass weight or the Shun Mook . .. the question is not whether those can be knocked off, but whether the knocked-off version sounds indistinguishable under uncolored testing conditions. That is really the issue here, I think. |
I heard that Dalby licensed the Flux Capacitor from Universal Studios to use in its next record clamp! |
Working on the paint now. Will let you know when I've got the formula right so that its performance matches the wild claims. |
@teo_audio, no outrage here, although there is a strong desire to rant. Yes, it is no surprise that a company that charges $1.9 million for a car no doubt charges a commensurately expensive amount for parts. That is not really the point here. What got and gets my goat is not the ridiculous price for a glorified paperweight, but the outlandish claims that are made to support why the glorified paperweight is going to make you think that its the Resurrection when you clamp it onto your LP. All of the silly audiophool language that cannot be proven in any objective way, such as "the music breathes so much more" or "the music sparkles like I've never heard before" when you use the $5800 paperweight. I have no problem with someone thinking, "hey, that is the $5800 paperweight that I have been looking for my whole life" and wants to buy it. That's great. I am objecting to the preposterous marketing claims of the alleged benefits of the $5800 paperweight beyond its cool looks and bragging rights.
|
Horror! Only a stock VPI clamp? How are you going to hear all of the sweetness and wildly expanded soundstage.
Cable risers look cool. People who come to visit and see your speaker cables on risers know that you are a real audiophile. |
