I do not wish to rain on anyone’s parade. There are many reasons why audiophiles sometimes don’t get the results they were expecting.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something that has happened countless times happened again last night. Ordinary people over for a party listening to some music easily hear things audiophiles argue endlessly don't even exist. Oh, its worse even than that- they not only easily hear but are stunned and amazed at what they hear. Its absolutely clearly obvious this is not anything they ever were expecting, not anything they can explain- and also is not anything they can deny. Because its so freaking obvious! Happens every time. Then I come on here and read one after another not only saying its impossible, but actually ridiculing people for the audacity of reporting on the existence of reality.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
Showing 50 responses by geoffkait
atdavidVendors unfortunately do do this, play with levels at trade shows. I caught a vendor of conditioner products doing this recently in Toronto. He thought I was just amazed at the difference ... Nope, I was measuring the levels. >>>>Uh, were you wearing your propeller hat? Did you demand controlled blind testing? Did you accuse them of doing do do? 🤗 |
Yuvalg9 I suggest you read posts by a chap named Mark Waldarp; He explains the futility of investing such a preposterous amount on speaker cables, interconnects, "hi-grade" power cables, and power conditioners; do yourself a favor and read his posts, or better yet, buy his book about sound theory; you won’t be disappointed. Mark is an extremely knowledgable audiophile, and he knows what he is talking about. The book is only $40; a well-spent investment. >>>>>Actually, his name is Mark Waldrep...Dr. Mark Waldrep. I ran across this tidbit of Dr. Waldrep’s whilst cruising the ‘net a moment ago, “A couple of weeks ago I wrote an article about an event that reported on some of the nonsense demos that happen at trade shows (you can visit the article by clicking here ). I deliberately avoided naming the salesperson who demonstrated the "benefits" of expensive — very expensive — power cords and the name of his company out of respect for the hosts. His demo produced audible/measurable increases in the amplitude of identical music selections. A result that is impossible according to the laws of physics. Electrical engineers and those with even a casual knowledge of how electrical circuits and power supplies work know that a heavy twisted cable worth thousands of dollars cannot — and should not — increase the plus and minus voltages needed by the various circuits in the equipment in question.” Gosh, can Dr, Waldrep be one of those Cargo Cultists I described earlier today? Well, shut my mouth and call me cornpone! Stay tuned to this channel, gentle readers. 🤗 |
This is all just an obvious case of mistaken indignity. Have you seen what it’s like out there? Do you ever actually leave the house? Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore! Doesn’t anybody think what it’s like to be the other guy? They don’t. They think we’ll just sit down and take it like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild! 🤡 |
I'm pretty sure those are my anti-customers. But thanks anyway. 🤑 Every crowd has a silver lining. - Old tweak-maker axiom Without blanket product promotion something terrible happens. Nothing. How do I feel to have to come here? Does it help to have someone to talk to? I think I felt better when I was locked up in the hospital. 🤡 |
mahgister =Oh, that! Why didn’t you say it earlier? Is is possible to have an object without any potential link to consciousness? Isn’t everything related on some level?» In the cartesian dualism there is a subject external to the things...Most materialistic science are born of this ideology...This ended after Max Planck...But some (Richard Dawkins for example) are slower to understand...:) No object is possible without a consciousness that are implicated with it and more than that always constitutive of it...All is related on another level yes...in pure mathematics, reality is totally revealed, it is a pure field of signification for the consciousness...I love mathematics not because I love to calculate, but because numbers are more real than a table for me.... And music is only sensible mathematics agitated by the heart for the ears... >>>>I’m afraid things are in much worse shape than you might realize. All of that philosophical stuff has its place, no doubt, but for AUDIO the biggest overachiever 🏋🏻♂️ has got to be Rupert Sheldrake. And the best part is that his theory of morphic resonance is something you can actually APPLY to audio. So, it takes things out of the realm of intellectualism and puts it directly into direct APPLICATION. And morphic resonance can be proven. Yes, that’s right. In fact, a 💰 prize WAS awarded to the person who proved it. The panel of judges included David Bohm, no mean philosopher himself. LONG LIVE INFORMATION FIELDS! 🤗 For the advanced student, https://www.sheldrake.org/files/pdfs/A_New_Science_of_Life_Appx_B.pdf |
thyname “‘’ atdavid, you sure are a nosey f%@*$er. And quite creepy“” No s@&*%t, you just realized that now? That’s what this guy does, full time. It’s his job. Every single Facebook group and audio forum. He has mastered the art of trolling. Can’t beat him I am afraid >>>He’s a troll? Are you hot doggin’ me? 🌭Well shut my mouth and call me cornpone! Shut the cave door and back to pigmy country! |
atdavid, I’m an aerospace engineer. I’m a theoretical physicist. Theoretical propulsion and theoretical fluid dynamics are both theoretical physics. Hel-loo! I never said I had a degree in Theoretical Physics. Get over it. That’s just your failing memory playing tricks on you again. Or else you’re lying. Take your pick. You’re wrong every time you open you’re mouth. You can’t seem to get things straight. Eat more fish. 🐟🐟🐟 |
prof The OP starts a thread denigrating audiophiles, and plays the well-meaning, high minded one when some refuse to join him in his cynicism, and continues to slime those with another view. I’m getting de ja vu... >>>>Yes, an obviously a well planned and coordinated attack by desperate determined pseudo-skeptics in an feeble and unsuccessful attempt to bring down audiophiles and controversial audiophile concepts. Sent by Grocery clerks to collect a bill. No big deal, it happens all the time. If it wasn’t so humorous it would be very boring. If they aren’t from The James Randi Educational Foundation they might as well be. |
What a moron! My curriculum in aerospace engineering was theoretical propulsion and fluid dynamics. That’s theoretical physics. My courses included statistical thermodynamics, nuclear engineering and indeterminate structures. I was in the first class of Aerospace Engineers at the beginning of the race to the moon 🌝 |
Well, shut my mouth and call me cornpone!! Let me get this straight. Teo actually thinks that glubson is serious or knows anything whatsoever about atomic physics. Are you hot dogging me? 🌭This is some kind of hilarious mix-up and high jinx! Whereas your friend and humble narrator actually studied atomic physics in school. But don’t let me shut down this great example of the soon to be famous patented glubson Brer Rabbit and Tar Baby routine. |
Let me help you out. Old audiophile axiom - You can’t debunk something that’s not bunk. • Keep an arsenal of scientistic buzzwords at the tip of your tongue. So armed, you can effortlessly explain away even the most firmly acknowledged mysteries with a few impressive phrases and a wave of your hand. For example, the undeniable but incomprehensible facts of animal migration may be definitively ascribed to a "biological spatio-temporal vector-navigation program." Likewise, you may call upon such quasi-substantial conceptual conveniences as "biological clock," "self-organization" and "cellular memory" to deflate any suggestion that orthodox science may lack satisfactory explanations for intractably puzzling phenomena. • Establish a crusading "Scientific Truth Foundation" staffed and funded by a hive of fawning acolytes. Then purport to offer a million-dollar reward to anyone who can repeatably demonstrate a paranormal phenomenon. Set the bar for paranormality nowhere in particular. Set the bar for repeatability at a "generous" 98%, safely ensuring that even normal scientific studies that demand a mere preponderance of evidence, or average results above chance, would fail to qualify for the prize. Should someone actually meet or exceed your criteria you can effortlessly dismiss their claim by pointing out that they’d just proven the phenomenon to be perfectly normal. |
12 angry men quotes Juror #12: Oh, come on. Nobody can know a thing like that. This isn’t an exact science. Juror #2: You said we could throw out all the other evidence! Juror #8: Prejudice always obscures the truth. Juror #8: Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn’t even have to open his mouth. Juror #7: I don’t know about the rest of ’em but I’m gettin’ a little tired of this yakity-yack and back-and-forth, it’s gettin’ us nowhere. So I guess *I’ll* have to break it up; I change my vote to "not guilty." |
What’s hilarious is there isn’t any argument any more about how the signal in cables and power cords and fuses is subject to external forces and noise such as vibration, magnetic fields and RFI/EMI. So I don’t know what all the ruckus is about. Same thing with wire directionality. The only argument is in the mind of the pseudo skeptic. You’re either ON the bus 🚌 or OFF the bus 🚌. There’s no middle ground. But the so called counter arguments are interesting but mostly entertaining. 🤗 OK, here’s a joke. What do you get when you mix a mentally mixed up loner with a society that abandons him and treats him like trash? You get what you deserve. An aggressive angry pseudo skeptic. 🤡 |
atdavid gets partial credit. Sadly, I do not dispense prizes for partial credit. In the case of the TV degaussing affects the picture quality, that’s true, by getting rid of stray magnetic fields - produced mostly by current moving through wires. But the mistake in logic is that current is not electrons. The picture quantity is not a function of electrons, which are fairly constant in number at any point in the system and any point in time. In the case of audio cables, electrons are not affected by magnets, as I described already, but the audio signal is. Anyone not following raise your hand. |
You might be right. All the electrons would stick to the magnets 🧲 OMG! 😬 On the other hand would opposing magnets 🧲 🧲 cancel each other out? Not to mention, electrons aren’t really the signal. I know, it’s very confusing? 😛 Furthermore, electrons have an electric charge NOT a magnetic charge. So, no, they are not affected by stationary magnets. Whew! That was a close one! 🥵 |