My impression of Geoff is that everything he says or does is for the purpose of remaining an enigma in every way shape or form. I suppose that has appeal to some. But being an enigma in general does not build confidence or trust, two key ingredients in most any relationship.
I keep hoping Geoff will become something other than an enigma that levitates towards any controversial topic in order to build that reputation apparently, but I might have a long wait I am thinking. He has some good knowledge, so I believe he could be less enigmatic and establish some credibility there if desired.
Whatever. Everyone is free to post. Everyone is free to draw their conclusions accordingly. |
10-01-12: Chadeffect
I have great respect for Mapman, Bryoncunningham and others here, but I do feel Geoff is getting some unfair treatment in this particular thread.
Did I miss something or is anger towards Geoff bleeding in from other discussions? Yes. It is impossible for me to limit my perception of Geoff to his behavior in this thread, and I suspect the same is true for others. Geoff and I have had two sustained arguments this year. The first was on the Magic thread, and the second was on the Fuse thread. Those links take you to the approximate points in the threads where the disagreements began. Both arguments went on for days, sprawled over a range of topics, and weren't pretty. I occasionally said things I regretted, and later apologized for it. But if you read those threads from the points I linked until their ends, you will see the principal source of my feelings about Geoff. Before those disagreements, I barely knew anything about him or Machina Dynamica. And I didn't really care whether Geoff was in the business of selling what many regard as nonsense. IMO, those threads demonstrate that Geoff routinely inserts himself into conversations with cryptic, provocative, and occasionally bizarre statements. Whether he does this to make mischief, to promote Machina Dynamica, or for some other reason is anybody's guess. I for one do not believe that Geoff is particularly interested in making meaningful contributions to discussions. You can certainly find posts in which he appears to contribute, but they are few by comparison to posts in which he is provocative, evasive, or antagonistic. This is my own view of Geoff. Others are of course free to form their own impression of who he is and why he participates in forums like these. Bryon |
I am off to buy some sand for my box so I can isolate my cello from its own self and any acoustic boundary. That will kill all those nasty vibrations. Tom |
Is there anyone who, after closely monitoring the posts of Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney, would venture to state that Geoffkait even comes close to them when it comes to the integrity of vendors? This is a very significant issue here and I will explain why.
It is not only incumbent on vendors who post here to make full disclosure -- for obvious reaons. It is also incumbent on them to meet certain standards if they are to be looked upon with respect here. If they do not meet those standards -- I believe that Bryoncunningham has highlighted some of these points regarding Geoffkait more eloquently than I have -- then their posts have to be looked upon advisedly.
There is no way that any vendor with an agenda that exudes self-centeredness can be taken seriously here. Nor should they be. By trying to appear interested in "the topic" they will betray their true agenda from time to time as their guard "slips". This kind of cunning use of these forums must be watched with vigilance lest discussions become hijacked by vendors looking to divert attention in their direction.
We have seen a perfect example of this today with Geoffkait trying to divert the discussion to the subject of polarity while stating that the person who initiated the thread had better "bow out" -- so that he, Geoffkait, can say whatever he likes without the need to read those bothersome threads that take him to task. Posters who object to him on the basis of various issues should be banished.
Have you ever read where Bobby Palkovic or Ted Denney or any other vendor stated that a poster should "bow out" -- let alone the initiator of a thread -- so that the field be left open for them to discuss the topics they chose for discussion without having to face posts from those who did not go along with them? What would people say if Bobby Palkovic or Ted Denney had the temerity to try such an outlandish thing? We have only to look at Bryoncunningham's excoriation of Geoffkait on various threads to see the exquisite details of Geoffkait's modus operandi. |
By the way, for those like myself who have experimented with polarity for any length of time and who are also familiar with Bybee products, reversing polarity can have a positive effect on holography. But, if you compare the effect of reversing polarity with the effect of Bybee products on holography, the effects of the latter dwarf the effects of the former by a very wide margin. So, the discussion should return to products that have the greatest impact in this area.
The discussion of products or technical "tweaks" that have a marginal effect on holography should not outweigh the discussion of products or "technical tweaks" that have a very great impact on holography. If the discussion moves to the marginal then it will be of very limited value to those who are actively looking for ways to improve the holography of their system. It will divert attention from very important products in this area. |
"When one asserts things that most will interpret as nonsense, that is bound to create a stir.
The solution is to explain the nonsense so as to address peoples concerns. Not change the subject, obfuscate, or go on the attack of the questioner."
One thing I find these days is that is is becoming increasingly common for people to create a stir as a simple means of garnering attention. I think it started to become a major phenomenon back in the late 80's with the ascent of shock jocks, Howard Stern being the most notorious. More and more people seem to leverage this approach these days as a means of garnering attention in an increasingly complex world where it might be harder to stand out for other more philanthropic reasons. |
If it sounds good, it sounds good.
Record producers do whatever they want to do in the interest of what they consider to be a good product. Nothing wrong with the listener doing the same as needed to deliver the sound they seek. Lots of ways to do it. No right or wrong. Its all a reproduction. Some like clear photos and some like abstract art. Whatever floats ones boat. Phase angle adjustment are just another tool at ones disposal if needed. Some of the most reknowned record producers in the world, like ALan Parson's, have been known to play similar tricks I believe. |
Now let's get back to the subject of Bybee products. How many who are reading this discussion have had experience with Jack Bybee's products? The reason I have put so much emphasis on them is that they have had more impact on the sound in my system than any other products. |
Mapman,
You have put this very well when you state, "Not change the subject, obfuscate, or go on the attack of the questioner." Of course, you must be talking about Geoffkait who is the most obvious changer of subjects and the most obvious obsfuscater and the most obvious attacker in this discussion. |
My subs sound best and measure the best when they are set at a phase angle of 70 degree's in relation to my mains hooked in phase. Out of phase speaker relationships between drivers and or separate cabinets create spatial errors that sound like Q sound on most every recording. How many Q sound recordings are available? Cool hallucinations but unreal. Tom |
Geoffkait,
I have put you on the spot and you now choose to sidestep the issue of Bybee products by redirecting the discussion about this specific issue that I brought up in my post to a discussion of frustration and anger. How clever. If you were a "humble scribe" you would not be asking ANYONE to "bow out" of any discussion. You have declared that you have the right to say anything you want. But this apparently only applies to you because others who may be angry or frustrated do not have the right to express their anger and frustration. They must "bow out". In effect, you are now the self-declared moderator of this discussion and you are making the rules about who can stay and who cannot. OF course, you get to stay. Your declaration of humility is obviously a false declaration.
My frustration may have got the better of you but it has certainly not got the better of me. It is very direct and to the point. And who are you, in all your false humility, to ask anyone to bow out of this discussion, let alone the person whom initiated this thread? If anyone should bow out it is clearly you. And you can do so graciously or not for all I care.
May I reiterate something that Bryoncunningham has said very eloquently on more than one occasion. You refuse to answer my questions directly and interpose another topic to redirect the discussion. To wit, who is more qualified to comment on Bybee products? The guy who has 20 of them in his system or the vendor who refuses to divulge how many Bybee products he has in his own system while pontificating about them with authority? How many Bybee products do you have in your system? Will you answer the question directly or will you invite me to bow out of this discussion? |
When one asserts things that most will interpret as nonsense, that is bound to create a stir.
The solution is to explain the nonsense so as to address peoples concerns. Not change the subject, obfuscate, or go on the attack of the questioner.
|
Sabai, it is actually you who have made me the center of discussion, not I. Your last 15 posts have all been directed at your humble scribe. If you have nothing more significant to add to this thread I suggest you either bow out gracefully or change your attitude. Your anger and frustration have gotten the better of you, I'm afraid.
Getting back to the subject of Holographic Sound, has anyone found absolute polarity to be a factor in achieving a high level of Holographic Sound? Since there are no standards for polarity, how can we be sure our system is not out of absolute polarity or Phase, if you will? |
By getting the discussion to swirl around his "esoteric" declarations, Geoffkait accomplishes his agenda -- to make himself the center of attention on these forums. He is a vendor with an agenda and this is good for business. This is the process whereby the thread is hijacked -- diverted by a vendor who will apparently use any tactic at is disposal to accomplish his own ends. He is not an audiophile who wants to express his ideas with other audiophiles. He is a vendor who wants to make commercial inroads by using these forums for his own ends. |
By expressing himself as he does, Geoffkait constantly draws attention to himself. He is, after all, esoteric -- according to him. Geoffkait's agenda is a self-centered one. You could never accuse Bobby Palkovic or Ted Denney of the same thing. |
Onhwy61,
That's the point. Who is more qualified to give a opinion about Bybee products that is meaningful -- that is based on actual experience? A guy who has 20 of them in his system or a vendor with an agenda who claims they are "controversial" -- and who gives no details about how many Bybee products he has in his own system? Who can be accused of setting off the BS meter? The guy who actually uses the products and has done so for many years or the vendor who talks off the top of his head with a sense of authority?
May I reiterate. If you go over the posts of respected vendors like Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney and compare them with the posts of Geoffkait, you will easily see that the posts of Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney are radically different in both tone and substance. We are talking about vendors who are in a whole other league -- people who talk straight about things they know about intimately -- vendors with deep understanding, vendors with substance and integrity.
It is the right of everyone here to talk about anything they like no matter how little they may actually know -- even if they are vendors. This is a free forum as Geoffkait proudly declares. So, he can say whatever he likes, he declares. But by expressing himself in this way he betrays the shallowness of his remarks in advance. You will never hear Bobby Palkovic or Ted Denney expressing themselves in such an inane manner on these forums.
If we are looking for integrity and substance we look to people who talk from experience. Opinions that are not backed by experience are a dime a dozen and should be viewed accordingly, especially when submitted by vendors who obviously appear here with a strong agenda. |
Geoffkait,
You can suggest whatever you like. That is your self-declared right here.
You stated, "I said Bybee's products were controversial, not ineffective." You can use whatever words you like. That is your self-declared right here. The word "controversial" can be used to describe just about anything under the sun. It simply means there is someone out there who may not agree. The word "controversial" is next to meaningless. It tells us nothing whatsoever about Bybee products. But that is your self-declared right here.
Chadeffect,
Geoff is getting what he deserves here -- nothing more and nothing less. If he wants to try to dominate this thread with all of his vendor-motivated nonsense he will be met with my responses until this thread is archived. He has the self-declared right to do whatever he likes here. I have the self-declared right to respond here. As long as my BS meter keeps detecting BS on this thread I will be posting here. |
My mind is open.... And yet to spill out..... |
Sabai, forgive me for saying this but i feel you are over reacting to Geoff.
We are just chatting about holographic sound and possible ways to get holographic sound from a system. Even if some ideas are unorthodox. How can this desolve into a slagging match? Come on friends.
I have great respect for Mapman, Bryoncunningham and others here, but I do feel Geoff is getting some unfair treatment in this particular thread.
Did I miss something or is anger towards Geoff bleeding in from other discussions? My hope is we can get back on point. Lets be gentlemen. |
How passing the Peace Pipe around gents and interacting with that for awhile. Tom |
No wonder i am a neophobe.... |
Can we all just get along?
One guy has more than 20 tweaks from one manufacturer operating in series and the other has his mind interacting with a lamp. I just hope it's not contagious. |
Sabai wrote,
"Jack Bybee's products are "controversial"? And I "must be living in a cave somewhere"? Man, you're what we used to call in the 1950s "a phony". I have upwards of 20 Bybee products in my system. Let me repeat in special English for those who may be "challenged": You have NO idea what you're talking about. My BS meter just had the needle go haywire with your name written all over it."
Your anger has blinded your reading comprehension, again. I said Bybee's products were controversial, not ineffective. Can I suggest taking a stress tab or cold shower, whatever? |
My recommendation to Geoff is to hire a good marketing director. That's not something you typically can learn in the defense industry, although how to lead and delegate when needed often is. |
Al,
Small sample set, but it would not surprise me....
o--o
/**\
\__/ |
Well, this thread seems to have established at least one thing with a high degree of conclusiveness. Those having backgrounds in defense electronics constitute a diverse group. :-)
Best regards,
-- Al |
Geoffkait,
You can say anything true or false here about anything or anyone -- that is your right.
You can say anything true or false about me -- that is your right.
You can say anything true or false about Jack Bybee or his products -- that is your right.
You can use this thread as a bully-pulpit as much as you like and for as long as you like -- that is your right.
You can attempt to dominate this thread as long as you like -- that is your right.
You can attempt to hijack this thread as long as you like -- that is your right.
You can talk off the top of your head until everyone -- except me -- dies of exhaustion -- that is your right.
You can talk off the top of your head until everyone dies of sheer boredom -- that is your right.
You can do as you wish on this free forum -- that is your right.
You have as many rights as you proclaim on this thread -- that is your right. |
Geoffkait,
You just revealed more that you realize. Anyone who uses Jack Bybee's products in their system will know exactly what I am talking about. In other words, you have NO idea what you are saying when you talk about his products. And if you knew Jack Bybee you would never make the kind of inane comments about him that you posted here.
Jack Bybee's products are "controversial"? And I "must be living in a cave somewhere"? Man, you're what we used to call in the 1950s "a phony". I have upwards of 20 Bybee products in my system. Let me repeat in special English for those who may be "challenged": You have NO idea what you're talking about. My BS meter just had the needle go haywire with your name written all over it.
You are the proverbial chameleon who shows a different color to match the background. Which is why, as Bryoncunningham so astutely observed recently, you have no clear identity. He has no idea who he is taking to when he talks to you -- and neither do I. You are the classic case of the opportunist who will say whatever it takes in order to keep attention focused on himself.
Now, instead of the hawking vendor, you turn into the pseudo-expert and the forum bully. Not that I give a damn -- I am too old for such nonsense -- I believe you are the only one here who will characterize me as closed-minded and self-satisfied. It is truly "bizarre" when you refer to things that I do as "unusual" and in the next breath you call me closed-minded.
How can a person who does so many interesting, experimental and "unusual" things be characterized as "closed-minded"? Only a vendor like you with an obvious agenda could be so inane -- and so crassly self-serving. I say "like you" because vendors like Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney who contribute to these forums are in a different league entirely. They are not pseudo anything. They are helpful, straight as an arrow, and they do not attempt to divert attention to themselves or to hijack threads.
We should start a VENDORS ONLY FORUM on Audiogon for self-centered people like you to spout off and pontificate to your heart's desire without other threads having to endure your exquisitely boring but oh-so-clever commentaries that fulfill your agenda to divert attention away from the intended topic in order to dominate the thread and promote your vendor's agenda. You are using this forum as a marketing tool -- and you are doing so in a most crass way. This reveals your level of consciousness.
If anyone is "pushing" anything here it it certainly you, the bully-vendor of last resort. Yes, you have the right to "post here and express" your ideas. And, yes, I have the right to call you on your hijacking this thread with endlessly inane commentaries. I started this thread and I am as free to say this loud and clear as you are to try to dominate here and to sabotage the original intent of this thread. If the moderator wishes to terminate this thread to force you to do your inane posting elsewhere I will be only to happy to see this happen. Otherwise, you can fully expect me to keep calling you on your inane behavior.
You have a sense of grandiosity that equals your sense of inanity. Have no fear, nothing you could possibly sell or say would ever "threaten" me -- or impress me. I've been around the block more times than you have had Sunday dinners. Do not try to bully or to insult or to intimidate me here without a very firm response. Do not expect that you will be able to do ANYTHING to make me leave this thread to your devices. It ain't gonna happen. As long as this thread is here I will be here. I will not let you dominate or hijack this thread. |
Regarding the OP's topic, I'm still with my original post on 9/14 which I think was also the first (maybe the last?) to actually address the topic at hand in a practical manner. |
Sabai, you have things all wrong. I have a military electronics background as well, can't you read? If you believe Jack Bybee's products are not controversial you must be living in a cave somewhere. I can certainly understand why he would not wish to enter into discussions here, if you get my drift. I do not defer to Jack Bybee on quantum mechanics, in fact Jack's Quantum Mechanics education is from 50 years ago.
For someone who pushes connecting cables in series and quantum products to be so closed-minded and self-satisfied is just bizarre. As a vendor of high standing on this forum for many years, don't you think I have a right to post here and express my opinions and ideas - just like you? There is no prohibition against vendors, reviewers, dealers, audio insiders, manufacturers. It is an open forum. BTW The Mind Lamp is not an audio product. You should not feel too Threatened by it, it's only a lamp. |
Stan
Your back from the edge...That's great..Contact me when you can. Tom |
Geoffkait,
When you use the word "quantum" you can defer to Jack Bybee whose military background has produced ground-breaking products that do not need to be hawked on Audiogon forums in a cloud of mystery. I can just hear Jack Bybee trying to hawk his products here -- "I sell the Mind Lamp". Lol. |
You know it when you hear it; don't you? |
Geoffkait,
As a troll who trawls for business who is distinguished more than anything else by the picayune while exuding a sense of the pseudo-esoteric with which to mask it, I would not exaggerate your importance on these forums as you attempt to intrude your agenda here.
I may note that it is fortunate that other vendors who visit these forums such as Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney never draw attention to themselves with self-pronouncements and do not attempt to surround themselves with mysterious airs. They do not need to. They are in a different league -- IMO. |
Back to mind-matter interaction for a moment, since there's not much floating around the Internet that informs one what the term means. VENDOR ALERT - I sell the Mind Lamp. Q word alert, the Mind Lamp operates quantum mechanically. The web site below provides some insight to some of the ideas I have been trying to get across. Mind-matter interaction works both ways.
http://www.mind-lamp.com/ |
Sabai wrote,
"Bryoncunningham,
Once again, you have nailed Geoffkait to the wall so perfectly that I could not have put this any better. Bravo."
I'm getting this image of Pontius Pilate, for some strange reason.
:-) |
Its true the same principles that apply to 3D mapping apply to holography in stereo recordings as well. |
I just remembered, when I was at Army Map Service one of my jobs was helping calibrate the collimators for the Swiss imaging system for viewing 3D maps. Holography rules! |
Geof,
If you used any systems or applications from Intergraph Corporation in Huntsville, AL then you might be familiar with some of the things I worked on in their formative stage back in the 80's. |
Mapman wrote,
"BTW i have a background in designing defense systems as well (digital mapping systems specifically hence my moniker)."
My first job was at Army Map Service in DC, a summer job. Of course Army Map Service eventually evolved into Defense Mapping Agency. I used to run calculations for Lorentz relativity equations on early Freiden calculators in my spare time. The office I was in was mapping the moon. |
GEoff is now saying something that makes sense to me. This positively affects my mind matter interaction when listening. Thanks Geoff!!!
Not that it has anything to do with all the stuff he says that does not, but at least it is on topic! |
Speaking of stereo image and soundstage, and all that jazz, here's an interesting take by John Atkinson, editor Stereophile Magazine. The following paragraphs are excerpted from his article published in 1986.
"So there we have it: a perfect stereo image implies a perfect soundstage. All is rosy in the audiophile garden.
Hmm. A suspicious word, perfect. Where's the catch?
Well, we have only been discussing the interaction between the two loudspeakers and the listener. What about the amplitude-information only, two-channel recording? Where does that come from?
When it comes to recording music, there are two mutually incompatible philosophies. One is to capture as faithfully as possible the acoustic sound produced by a bunch of musicians, in effect treating a performance as an event to be preserved in a documentary manner. The second, which is far more widespread, is to treat the recording itself as the event, the performance, using live sounds purely as ingredients to be mixed and cooked. This, of course, is how all nonclassical recordings are made. The sound of an instrument or singer is picked up with one microphone, and the resultant mono signal, either immediately or at a later mixdown session, is assigned a lateral position in the stereo image with a panpot. As this is a device which by definition produces a ratio of amplitudes between the two channels, it would seem that every recording made this way is a true amplitude-stereo recording, capable of producing a well-defined stereo image.
Do such recordings have a soundstage associated with that image, however?
Sometimes.
When producing such a recording, the producer decides how much and what type of reverberation should be associated with each of the mono sound sources, and also decides where in space that reverberation should be positioned. There is no reason at all why the ambience surrounding, say, a centrally placed lead vocalist, should have any relationship with that around the drums. Or the guitar. Or the synthesizer. And if it doesn't, then the listener doesn't hear a soundstage. Rather, he hears a collage of individual musical events, bearing no spatial relationship to one another." |
Sabai, for the record, like Bryon, though we may not agree on everything, I concur that you seem sincere and are honest with your thoughts and truly interested in learning, so I commend you on that. |
Finally I will say that I believe Geoff is 100% sincere when he talks about mind matter interaction. Its your mind and his attempts to affect how you think that changes its interaction with matter. He can sell almost anything and claim success accordingly. If someone thinks it sounds better, that's all that matters, whether in fact it does or not.
At least that is my take on Geoff. Do I approve of this is true? Not the way Geoff does things as best I can tell. He is not forthcoming about anything much. He just pushes tweaks. It doesn't matter what it is. WIth his approach, a telephone book may have better results than tweak b, even if tweak b in fact does something.
At least this is my best guess. I could be wrong. I do not expect anything from GEoff to really help me learn anything, even anything about himself.
So it is what it is so take it for what it is. |
I had no idea holographic sound was so controversial. Obviously it is recording specific, but can anyone really doubt it's existence?
I have heard single microphones give the impression of depth! (Usually tube mics) Let alone multiple mics arranged to reproduce the stereo soundstage.
I may need to bow to others knowledge, but surely the delay between the microphones is what captures this. Even if this is faked using software at the mix stage of the process this can be quite convincing.
I do find that those spacial cues are the most delicate to capture and retain through the chain. Data compression like MP3s murder this information. But once heard cannot be denied. HD audio is the saviour for digiphiles looking for this. |
Bryoncunningham,
You're very welcome. Thank you for your kind reply. It is greatly appreciated. I would also add you to my list of those whose posts create a clear idea of the person behind them. No apology necessary here. I do not feel that you have hijacked this thread at all. I think it is clear that a number of others have done the job very well.
I will be on the road for a few days and will have a chance to reply to recent posts within a day or so. |
BTW i have a background in designing defense systems as well (digital mapping systems specifically hence my moniker).
I work for a private corporation in a different industry these days.
Also I am not a vendor though I worked selling audio gear in various places back in my college days. |
Chad,
I think people would be less concerned about Geoff and his contributions if he were not a vendor potentially profiting from his actions. Vendors who are forthcoming and clearly add value like Atmasphere catch relatively little flack. In fact, most appreciate that they are willing to share their expertise in a forum like this. |
Sabai wrote,
"Is it so difficult to answer my question? What's the mystery? Why can't you give a straight answer to a straight question? In case you did not notice, my question was very simple -- and very straight. In fact, I believe it was not very difficult to understand. Your evasive reply was "I kinda doubt you've heard what all of them have said on the subject". This is not a good enough answer -- with or without the Lol at the end. Why can't you name names? Why can't you give us specific statements that specific people have made? Why can't you put facts in place of evasive replies? I can read English as well as the next person on this thread. I'm waiting. We're waiting."
Clarke Johnsen and Kal Rubinson, senior reviewers/writers at large for Stereophile magazine and Positive Feedback, respectively, to name two industry insiders, have expressed the opinion that obtaining a real, 3D soundstage is either (1) not of great importance overall or (2) not obtainable at all since any 3D soundstage is "artificial" or imaginary (in the mind of the listener). These opinions were expressed over on AA. Lord knows where their statements are archived, but somewhere, no doubt. For the record, I do not agree with those opinions.
Cheers |
09-30-12: Sabai
Bryoncunningham,
Once again, you have nailed Geoffkait to the wall so perfectly that I could not have put this any better. Bravo. Thank you, Sabai. Let me take this as an opportunity to apologize to you for contributing to the hijacking of this thread, which you began. FWIW, I would add you to the list of people whose posts create a clear idea of the person behind them. In your case: sincere, open-minded, and passionate. You and I sometimes agree, sometimes don't, but we've handled our differences without any hostility. I appreciate that. Bryon |
