Yeah I know, a controversial topic, but after 30+ years of hearing both sides and seeing how the argument has evolved over the years, I want to say my piece.
First, I want to debunk the idea of ever using the term, "Snake Oil" because it has been incorrectly appropriated and is not being applied genuinely. For a product to be "Snake Oil" it isn't a simple matter of, "it doesn't do what it claims to do." It has to contain a few more qualities. Chief among them, the materials or ingredients have to be fake, falsified, or non-existent. I have yet to encounter a single premium cable manufacturer who has claimed to use copper or silver and it was fake.
This would be an example of cable "Snake Oil" if it existed:
Company claim: "A 10 gauge speaker wire made of ten 9's pure silver, extracted from conflict-free mines, using NASA quality FEP dielectrics, braided in 24 strands of 17 gauge wire, all concealed in the newly developed element, Star-Spangled-Bannerite, that enhances and boosts all frequencies, repairing broken audio as it travels down the conductor."
Reality: Cutting open the wire you find 3 strands of 14 gauge aluminum wire, wrapped in Glad's saran-wrap, threaded through a 10 gauge rubber garden hose, covered in a fancy colored net.
My biggest problem with the nay-sayer community is the hypocrisy of their accusation that premium quality cables are "Snake Oil" when their charts, measurements and tests have the same level of skepticism they purport to debunk. Using "Snake Oil" to prove "Snake Oil?" Ask yourself the following questions when you next see some online or vlog rant about how cables don't make a difference and they have the measurements to prove it:
1) Did they actually connect the cables to speakers and listen? 2) If they made measurements, did they show you how those cables were connected when they conducted the tests? 3) If it is a vlog, did they show in the video live footage of them conducting the test or is everything after-the-fact? 4) How does the test prove quality and how does the author quantify "quality?"
99% of the time the answer is "no." You just see people posting pictures of charts that could have been made using any form of software. Heck, I could make one in Photoshop that dictates any conclusion I want. The truth is, there isn't a single form of equipment or measurement software that tests the actual perceived quality or clarity of a signal.
For example, "that guy" from Audioholics posted a video bashing a $4000 Audioquest speaker cable. He claims to have run it through tests and he posted pictures of graphs that he gave conclusions for. Not once did he show how it was connected to the machines or equipment. More over, he claimed to have broken the cable, by easily snapping off the banana plug (made of pure copper coated in silver). Well, if that were true, then how could he have possibly connected the cable correctly to test it? He also claimed the cable was on loan from Audioquest. Red flag. Audioquest does not send out one speaker cable to test; they'd have sent out a pair. He also wasn't at all concerned that he had broken a $4000 loaner cable. Therefore, I suspect someone else broke their own cable and let "this guy" borrow it for a video. Lastly, he claims to test the effectiveness of the "DBS" system by showing you a digital read out on some other machine. He claims to unplug the DBS system live...but...off screen, and the digital read out changes. That makes absolutely no sense, since the DBS system isn't tied to the actual conductors or connectors. It's a charged loop from end to end and only keeps the insulation's dielectric field charged. So unplugging it while a signal is being passed through the cable wouldn't change anything. Therefore, the nay-sayer argument, in this instance, was nothing more than "Snake Oil" trying to prove "Snake Oil."
Another time, someone was given a premium XLR cable, but had no idea what an XLR cable was. They didn't recognize the connector format; a red flag straight away! Then goes on to claim all the different measurements they took from it and how it was no better than the free cables you get from manufacturers. Well, if that is true, how was this cable connected to the equipment? If he didn't know what the XLR format was, then it stands to reason they didn't have an XLR input on the equipment they used to test. Therefore, how in the world was this an equitable or viable test of the quality if the cable's conductors weren't all being used correctly during the test? Not once did this person connect it to an audio system to say how it sounded. How do electrical measurements translate into sound quality if one refuses to listen to it?
My final argument against the nay-sayers is one they all have the most trouble with. They don't use the Scientific Method. For example, where's the control in these tests? What system or cable do they universally *ALL* agree is perfect and that they test against? The systems and cables always change and are never consistent. Why is it that they argue for an A / B test, but aren't willing to set one up for themselves? As if it's someone else's responsibility because they refuse to be responsible for their conclusions. Why is it that they only test low end or middle grade cables, but never seem to run these tests on the highest levels? Why is it that the majority of nay-sayers never purchase any of this equipment to find out for themselves?
What I have discovered after 30+ years of arguing this topic, is that the nay-sayers just don't want to have to buy expensive cables. Instead they seek out any form of cognitive bias they can find to use as justification to not buy it. Then suddenly concern themselves with other people's purchase power and tell them not to purchase such cables, as if these people are spending their money. Or they claim that they should have spent all that money on better equipment. Touche', but if they bought better equipment, they'd still buy premium cables to push that better equipment. That's like saving your money to buy a Lamborghini, then deciding on buying 15 inch steel rims with narrow tires for it because wheels are wheels...they bought a better vehicle, so won't need premium tires...or premium gas because the engine is superior. *eye roll.* What it seems to boil down to is that they don't like the idea that just buying premium cables alone can surpass a high grade, well-engineered system. To borrow from my car analogy, buying premium tires for a 4-cylynder hatch back won't make it go any faster, but it will effect some performance, likely gas mileage and road grip. Using the same analogy, buying better cables is akin to buying a turbo kit, back-exhaust system, better suspension, better intake valves, better cold air filters, etc to make that 4-cylinder hatch back perform nearly as well as a stock
Lamborghini.
Final thoughts, "Snake Oil" salesmen back in the day weren't just interested in defrauding their customers, they wanted to do it with the least amount of effort. They didn't try to get authentic, high quality ingredients to make the oil look or taste better. They used whatever was on-hand and as free as possible. Cable companies sure seem to go out of their way to acquire the best possible conductors and materials, and have R&D teams engineer complicated wire geometries and spend years finding ways to treat the cables, or develop active tech to impact the signal, just so they can make a few bucks. If the product had absolutely no impact on sound quality, at all, it wouldn't take long for well-engineered systems to reveal their faults and the industry would tank, almost over night. Clearly, they haven't and it's because it isn't "Snake Oil" no matter how many times that old trope is trotted out.
One of the serious problems in this entire discussion is that the
perception of "quality" is 100% subjective to the listener, the state of
the equipment, the room it is being conducted in, and health of the
listener. After years of auditioning my system to people, I realized it isn't a simple matter of asking, "How did that sound to you." You have to be very specific. Ask, "Did you hear that specific sound?" 9 times out of 10, they'll say they didn't hear it. So you play it again and point it out. Then they light up and realize that no matter how many times they heard that song, they had never heard that particular sound. Then they go and compare it to the car radio or through their device's ear buds and realize they cannot hear it or couldn't hear it as clear. Then they come to respect what you're trying to achieve.
“After several high end cable auditions I settled on a pair of $1000 Kimber
Kable”
So let me get this straight, you auditioned several cables and heard enough of
a difference to “settle” on Kimber Kable…but then heard no difference? Sorry,
that doesn’t make much sense.
I would ask if you “auditioned” other cables on your system or on someone else’s
system? If it was someone else’s system,
then isn’t entirely possible they had other components, tweaks or
configurations your $50,000 system doesn’t have?
This wasn't your assertion in the original post. Your entire narrative is about "arguments against the naysayers", and never did you state "to each his own - which I would totally agree with.
In fact how do you reconcile writing this:
It only becomes a problem when someone thinks their position is superior to others and uses belittling or berating language to justify their decision.
when you originally wrote this?
What I have discovered after 30+ years of arguing this topic, is that the nay-sayers just don't want to have to buy expensive cables. Instead they seek out any form of cognitive bias they can find to use as justification to not buy it.
This is total assertion of a superior position!
I'm not a naysayer, I'm just saying tweaks haven't done much for my system and are easily eclipsed in value by focusing on the primary components, recordings, and overall room acoustics. No cognitive bias as you assert but rather experiences that didn't have a positive outcome. There are many just like me....many of us try things and then move on.
What's more interesting is that the brain automatically fills in the gaps of any data it thinks is missing. This includes sound. If a song had slight gaps in its melody, due to poor recording, bitrate, resolution, etc, our brains will attempt to fill those gaps. Psychology has proven that as a certainty.
My wife, for example, speaks multiple languages and sometimes has trouble with certain English vowel sounds, they sound exactly the same to her; she CANNOT discern any difference no matter how you enunciate the difference. I wouldn't dare say she is inferior or defective, as I certainly cannot speak multiple languages and would have equal trouble trying to pronounce them (give Finnish a go!). I suspect something similar is going on for why some people can or cannot hear a difference, but there are far too many variables at play:
1) Power output to the location (house/apartment/etc) 2) Room acoustics. 3) Speaker placement. 4) Outside interference. so on and so on....
I have a pair of vintage DCM Timeframe 600s that I bought when they first released in 1994. Since then, it has been attached to four different stereos/amps, three different sets of main speaker cables and 15 different rooms. Each time the system sounded different. Some of that is measurable, some of it cannot.
I have a system in the 50k range. I insist cables do make a big difference. I was using a $100 pair of cables that were somewhat "low end." I had a friend tell me my cables were the weak link in my system. After several high end cable auditions I settled on a pair of $1000 Kimber Kable's. After a long burn in process, I found they made very little if any difference to the sound in my system. However, I kept them because they are the best looking cables I've seen for under $2000.
Exactly. It only becomes a problem when someone thinks their position is superior to others and uses belittling or berating language to justify their decision.
@Three_Easy_Payments" "
My views on tweaks and products that could fall under the category of "snake oil" are based solely on my own experience.
"
As are mine, as are anyone's. You're saying cables and fuses, etc never made much of a difference for you. Your experience doesn't automatically discount everyone else who did experience a change. Therefore, the idea of "Snake Oil" is disingenuous. You can say, "it didn't work for me" and that's valid and doesn't require any rebuttal. However, if you arbitrarily label anything that didn't work for you as "Snake Oil" you invite rebuttal; and maybe that's always been the point. Poke the hornet's nest because the hornets are too happy where they are. *Shrug*
"
What I'm very dubious about is whether there is any justification in the
scientific literature for calling that treatment, whatever it is,
Quantum Tunneling. It certainly sounds good, but is that all there is
to it?
"
Just being 110% honest here, yes. I think that is all there is to it. They chose the name, even if the process has nothing to do with the actual Quantum Tunneling theory.
My views on tweaks and products that could fall under the category of "snake oil" are based solely on my own experience. I have tried many and most don't make a material difference in my system - certainly not at a price-to-performance basis. Cabling hasn't made a huge difference but is worth paying attention to. Isolation does work but it's not worth going crazy on cost and implementation. Fuses...can't hear the difference.
My focus is on finding great recordings in any format and listening to them through really good primary components. The juice just isn't worth the squeeze on all these tweaks - and this isn't based on any school of thought, just my own personal experiences. Who wants to waste money? Finding amp/speaker combos with gorgeous synergy - now that's worth focusing on in spades!
@jrsavageasd Or....could it be that you don't want to take the risk and would rather let "Electrical Engineers" give you an out?
I have spoken to several "Electrical Engineers" and all of them say similar things, but the more you boil down their knowledge, you realize it never had anything to do with analog audio signals. It's always about power distribution. Does "X" component have enough voltage, wattage and amperage to perform the functions of "Z" component. So they manufacture equipment to test for these features and therefore haven't the slightest idea how to build a test apparatus that can say with any certainty that one cable sounds better than another. The only machine capable of that distinction is the human ear and golly, gee, wow, nature decided that we should all have individually oriented and configured ear drums, etc.
The problem with all the "data" that is spewed forth by nay-sayers, electrical engineers and test equipment is that they never say how any of that data translates into sound quality. NONE of it. You can sit there and talk about THD, amplitude of x,y,z frequency, but can't tell in terms of, "it affects the attack and decay of a piano note" or "it allows the hammer of a kick drum to be heard before the resulting bass wave" or it allows you to pick up on the jingle of the singer's jewelry as they get too close to the mic when singing.
If you're satisfied with your system's audio capabilities without high end cables, that's fine. No one is ever going to say that is wrong. But in the same token, it isn't your place to say other people are wrong for buying expensive cables to push their systems differently than yours. I also think it is wrong to label all expensive cables as, "snake oil" until you can prove it definitively and without the use electrical engineer test machines that aren't designed to test audio quality.
@avitacoma "
I won’t pay more than $50 for an interconnect or $100 for a set of speaker cables
"
I used to have that same theory, but one day I decided to take a chance and it changed everything. If you are unwilling to take risks then you're unwilling to be happy.
"
until somebody does placebo controlled double blind studies on these expensive cables
"
Just curious why it's someone else's responsibility to convince you? If you don't want to spend the money, then don't. You aren't under any pressure to do so. I mean think about it, if someone *DID* do the double blind study and proves it, would you suddenly want to buy the cables....or...would you just move the goal post?
Is it because we’re too cheap to buy $4,000 worth of speaker cable - I would say no to that. I have close to 30k invested in my system and still feel the need to optimize.
Could it be we know Electrical engineers that explained to us that some of the claims expensive wire companies make, would make a slight difference if you had 3 miles of cable to run and the need to power up a few houses? While the scientific principles may be correct that doesn’t mean it’s audible.
Maybe it’s relationships we have with retired speaker wire executives who shared " There’s a lot of fairy dust included when making speaker wire?"
Maybe we understand human behavior and realize after you spend thousands of dollars on cables ... You REALLY want/need to hear some kind of difference.
Seems to me, if you owned a speaker wire company you’d use testing results to sell your cables ! Look, everyone ... At XYZ frequency it’s obvious my wires have superior THD, lower resistance, and less capacitance than Audioquest or Cardas. Can you imagine the long line to buy those cables?
Claimants of snake oil are disingenuous at best. Those not using those $3 aluminum conductor tin plated connector cables and using copper and gold plated connectors are already admitting to metallurgical differences. The next implicating statement they often use, 'any competently engineered cable is sufficient.' And so now engineering becomes part of equation, really!
p05129, I choose cables based on the guage and the quality of the connectors. I have $22,000 in my system. I’m as much an audiophile as anyone in this thread, but I am skeptical of many of the overpriced tweaks.
I can afford to buy this boutique wire but I consider it a waste of money. Clearly, many of you are bamboozled by the placebo effect, which effect is exploited by this cottage industry for profit. If these devices are so much more effective than my $50-100 wire, where’s the data?
Snake oil is a scam that offers benefits which do not exist. The accuracy with which the ingredients are described is not important to this definition.
I am not as big of a skeptic of high end cables so much as a skeptic of their price or value. In the rare times when I did hear differences due to cables it was rarely worth the asking price. How so many audiophiles can hear these tiny alterations in rooms with mediocre to poor acoustics boggles my mind.
In the end though we need to make choices about spending with an explicit and value oriented mindset. Is it worth it to train your ear to hear such differences, when present or does it detract from enjoying music? If it is different is it actually better or just different? Is that difference worth the asking price? Chasing down different and more expensive tweaks is often a road to both madness and a terrible sounding system.
Personally once I found the solid pure silver balanced IC available from Parts Connexion I never ever bought IC’s again:
As if the op can encapsulate terminology with 19th century implications. Words evolve. Get over it. Snake oil exists in our world. If one chooses to keep the blinders on more power to you.
@guakus I'm not questioning whether they apply some form of treatment to their cables and fuses (like sending a jolt of electricity through them). What I'm very dubious about is whether there is any justification in the scientific literature for calling that treatment, whatever it is, Quantum Tunneling. It certainly sounds good, but is that all there is to it?
femoore12, congratulations on your discovery. That was nice of your friend to loan you the cables. Likely, as with most other skeptics, you would not have changed your mind had you not experienced it. The interesting part is that were you to test only one or two cables, you may have concluded wrongly that they did not make much difference. I have been saying for a decade that to arrive at a proper conclusion in regard to cables, one should compare sets.
Two truths I will repeat for the community: A skeptic's mind will most likely not be changed by any amount of discussion, because of their a priori commitment to "science" - which they arbitrarily pick to support their resistance to spending money... a nice reinforcing belief. A skeptic will typically not spend the money to get the experience. They want you to think it's because of the "science", but it is really because the wallet rules their decision making process. Audio means so little to them that they will not spend any money on trying it. Meanwhile, they want the community to think they have a very serious, hard core commitment to superior sound... It's all about perception. :)
Ergo, complete waste of time to argue with a cable skeptic who is unwilling to do the work or spend the money to test it out for themself.
"Trust your ears." If you want to hear what the mastering engineer heard those are the last organs you want to trust.
Like the color palette of a projector there is a right and lots of wrongs. It takes some sophisticated test equipment to calibrate a projector correctly. Should I trust my eyes? Ears and Hi Fi gear are exactly the same. You might have some idea what a system should sound like if you had been living with a correctly adjusted one otherwise, the sound you like is the sound you have been listening to. People will tell you all the time they have great bass when in reality they have very little. Our brains will extrapolate down to the fundamental from the overtones and harmonics when in reality the fundamental is not there at all. Trust your ears?
A Hi Fi system's performance is measurable, easily so. The problem is the vast majority of audiophiles have no way of making adjustments so why measure? I can just trust my ears with a brain that likes to make things up. The technology now exists to make these adjustments and calibrate a system so that what you are hearing closely matches what the mastering engineer heard. From there you can make adjustments to suit taste. This assumes of course that issues like room acoustics are handled correctly.
Hi Fi gear should have no sound of it's own. It's output should be a perfect reflection of it's input. To adjust a system with defective equipment trying to cover one error with another is odd to say the least.
Those of you that think your hearing is good enough need to see what your system is actually doing. Call it a learning experience.
As for snake oil? All I can say is that the is a host of gear out there for which the manufacturer's claims are not just false but frequently comical. I do not care what you call it.
Avitacom - you must be from the ANA site that has a strict limit of $50 for a cable. Let me ask you this: you want all of this scientific evidence for cables but it looks like you are using something better than zip cord and the .05 cent cable that comes with pioneer and Sony equipment, why? What charts/data did you see that convinced you to use a little bit better cables than stock? And what data/chart did you see that shows you cable quality stops at a magical $50/$100? You want data? Try this: using your ears instead of others telling you which is better. If you can’t hear then why are you in audio?
Get a good resolving system that allows you to hear the better components. Buying a pioneer or denon system will not get you there
Spend some $$$ to get a better system. Spending $300 on an audio system won’t get you there either.
So, snake oil is a fraud with a physical form. Fraud with no physical form is something else.
Did I get this right guakus?
The effect is the same, believers kidding themselves they are hearing stuff.
With connection cables carrying signal I have heard changes, some gross (both ways). I favour silver interconnect in my system. I have never heard any change with correctly specified power cables or fuses. The guys that do are just making out their hearing is better or they have 'taught' themselves to hear better. That's snake oil for me.
Thank you gaukus for taking on what is for some folks a very touchy subject. The luxury of being 65yrs of age is that I can summarily dismiss, and habitually avoid, those who use terms like “snake oil” when they’re poorly describing any piece of audio gear or cable because they most often times have no idea what they’re talking about. When reading about different people’s experiences in hi-fi and somebody screams snake oil, I just look upon it as comic relief and nothing more.
I think the actual widespread use of a product makes up for the nonsensical hyperbole attached to Magic Audio items...if something works, people will find their way to it. Note how much silly audio stuff with imagined technology gets ignored instead of getting the reaction the alleged fabulousness of it would otherwise deserve, allowing the snakes to slither away to oblivion.
Until such time that a piece of test equipment can accurately display ‘graphs’ of how my brain interprets what I actually hear, all graphs from test equipment are pointless.
I used to be in the camp that believes that cables shouldn't matter to how my system sounds. A friend of mine convinced me to borrow a set of cables from the Cable Company to see if I could hear a difference between the Blue Jeans cable I was (past tense) using and a higher end brand. I talked to the folks at the Cable Company and they recommended Synergistic Research Foundation cables (full loom) for my system. The cables arrived, I hooked them up, and then I sat down to listen and learned that I had been wrong in my opinion that cables did not matter. I guess since these cables were already broken in I heard a dramatic soundstage improvement immediately. I could hear the depth between the musicians and even clearly hear the decay between cymbal strikes. It was amazing. It felt like I was back on stage again.
I have replaced my cables. I will replace the power cables next. The folks shouting "snake oil" tend to think they are saving people from wasting their money. I don't know who made them the cops over how others spend their own money, but they really need to find a different hobby.
You have gone to so much trouble trying to prove your point. Just for you and out of respect for all that effort, hereafter I will rename it all to "copper oil" :)
dadork wrote: "
Twenty years ago I spent homeless nights on the streets of New Orleans. The reason I'm not still there or dead is I knew it was my fault and my responsibility to change my circumstances. Tonight I'm sitting listening to a hell of a fine system in a house I own with my wife."
Seriously... Congratulations sir!
To the OP, Thank you for taking the time to post this thread. The "Snake Oil" term has been thrown around this community like a club for years. Thank goodness high end audio continues to improve in spite of it all.
@russ69
I'm sure this is the main reason. The Proletariat unable to achieve a higher position must chastise the Bourgeoise to feel better about themselves.
Maybe it was a faux pas but thankfully if you live in the good old US of A there are no proletariat unable to do anything they want to do. If rising above there circumstances is what they want to achieve they most certainly can.
I know it's popular to believe it's somebody else's fault and the last part of the quote is most certainly true, shifting blame is self gratifying. I think it's been very unfortunate for future generations of Americans to teach them it's someone elses fault then use the force of government to 'rectify the injustice'. I saw a clip of an elected official not long ago declaring their intent openly, paraphrase ' you got it, we want it, we're taking it'.
These are the naysayers and scoffers and people who tell you how unjust and immoral of you. What everyone has to realize is rich is always relative. I guarantee you if you a reader of this forum no matter how rock bottom your gear is you are rich to someone.
Twenty years ago I spent homeless nights on the streets of New Orleans. The reason I'm not still there or dead is I knew it was my fault and my responsibility to change my circumstances.
Tonight I'm sitting listening to a hell of a fine system in a house I own with my wife.
Sounds like you have visited the ANA site. Those wannabe audiophiles don't have the ears/the budget/the system to compare cables so they always state a cable over $50 is snake oil. They try to prove their point bringing in so called NASA experts/PE's to try to prove their point. I wonder where the lawsuit sits between Synergistic Research and the Audioholics clown? But what is worse: guys on ANA that are cable naysayers that don't test out the product or have even seen the product calling it snake oil, or, like somebody on many of these threads, without hearing/evaluating some speakers they were getting, already claiming they were better than Wilson's $1M speaker system (which they don't have) and goes out of the way telling people that any model of this brand of speaker is perfect for them while never hearing or even seeing the speaker being bragged about. Both types of posting is wrong.
I have a biamped system with an electronic crossover and that arrangement requires alot of cabling, both interconnects and speaker cables. I have some very sophisticated equipment and I am a serious listener, not a consumer of “background music.” I won’t pay more than $50 for an interconnect or $100 for a set of speaker cables until somebody does placebo controlled double blind studies on these expensive cables. I’m just not going to spend a lot of money on wire based on hype and anecdotes. Also, Ive noticed, and this was true of my career in medicine, when there is a lack of meaningful DATA about a topic, alot of VERBIAGE tends to be generated.
I know exactly how you feel. I am actually experiencing it right now. I just got my Synergistic Research Foundation 3.5 mini to RCA cable to replace the Audioquest Yosemite. The first several hours have been "flat." It isn't the high-pitched 'shrill' that tends to get reported regarding silver cables.
The good news is, the cable is proceeding almost exactly like the previous SR Foundation cable did on my subwoofer (RCA to RCA.) It starts off good, but sort of flat. Then on the over night burn in, it opened up and started to get great. Now, months later, it's awesome. So I figure this cable needs a few days or a week to truly settle in.
I still feel worried it won't reach the same richness the AQ Yosemite was doing. I really don't want to get the AQ Angel.
So, for now, this cable is Schrodinger's Interconnect. It is both a bad cable and a great cable....we will see....;)
Thank you guakus for saying what needs to be said (unfortunately over and over again)!
I love the process of listening to new components (all cables are components). Not just in the hopes of finding the next new thing that bring some modicum of improvement to my system, but for the pure love of learning more about this "hobby". Listening to new cables next to my reference cables is part of the journey. There have many been times where there's no clear winner. Quite often there are trade offs, which begs the question, what am I really searching for. Then there are the rare moments that lift me above what I thought was even possible. I say rare because I can't afford to test every component I would like to, not because they aren't out there.
I believe there are currently more than a handful of manufacturers out there, who like us are passionate audiophiles searching for that same moment of discovery of being lifted above what they thought was possible.
@tablejockey Do it! We are on the stinky water Lagoon, just south of Carlsbad Village! I worked many countless hours between El Segundo and Seal beach…. my fave old world Italian place is in Long Beach. I ride 100-150 miles a week, but i cheat with a Quantum enabled ebike.
For the sales guys: Make the Ask ! It works for $250 m jets…. ask me how I know…
Doesn't really bother me that folks don't "get it." I am used to that. I wanted my point of view posted for posterity as it can be found via Google Search. ;)
I have always been the odd duck. I don't strive for popularity. I strive for happiness. I am happy with my setup and to date, no one who hears it says it sucks. :)
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.
