Anybody else read this review?

treitz3

Ding, ding, ding! Suuuuuurvey Says?!

shack

treitz3 wrote:

...and these are the days of our lives.....

Of course they are....

WilliamM2

BlueFox wrote: »

Yes.

I have to admit I do feel a little sorry for those whose hearing is so poor they cannot hear obvious differences.

What about those whose hearing is so great, but they can't detect "obvious differences" unless they can see the object they are listening to?

But I have no sympathy for those whose minds are so rigid they cannot accept the fact that we do yet completely understand either the physical universe, or human biology.

Or those whose minds are so rigid, that they can not accept what we do know, because it conflicts with their beliefs.

treitz3

Belief is not part of the audiophile vocabulary. The sounds and nuances are there or they aren't. When are you going to get that through your.............?

Many of us on this board do not need to see. We only need to hear.

vc69

Yeesh. :rolleyes:

I wonder why people are so unwilling to just let us be. We are quite happy in our delusional, uninformed sonic bliss.:p

I wish these morons would piss off. I don't need anyone telling me what I hear. Jeebus!

BlueFox

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Or those whose minds are so rigid, that they can not accept what we do know, because it conflicts with their beliefs.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. You phrased it better than I did.

For example, we know that different speaker wires have different electrical characteristics. This is measureable. We know the electrical characteristics of the wire will affect the signal traveling over the wire, affect the source of the signal, and affect the destination of the signal. All of this will produce a sonic signature unique to that combination of electronics, wire, and speaker. Different wire will produce different sonic signatures with the same electronics, or vice versa.

Yet, they are people whose minds are so rigid they cannot accept these simple basic, physical principles. Rather they want to deny this occurs because they are closed minded, and ignorant of basic electrical theory and operation. Or their hearing is so poor they cannot hear the end result, and then try to project their flawed sense of hearing as the norm.

Thanks again for making my point clearer.

Cpyder

GV#27 wrote: »

So is that how things at CP work now?Every new member that shows up with an opinion that doesn't quite line up exactly as it should and he gets labeled a troll and then piled on.?:eek:He has a mere ten posts,might he be given more a of chance?

Now you're getting it! But seriously, you're pretty much right. I don't like it but it happens a lot. Also, I do think some people correlate number of posts with credibility, which is also a fallacy.

Here's a demonstration for you:

I don't feel that an extremely exotic, expensive power cord can do anything beneficial to the electricity delivered by 100 miles of standard quality power line from outside your house. You need some sort of filter to accomplish this. This view, contradicts with some of the people with the highest posts around here.

So -
A. My opinion doesn't count as much because I only have a couple hundred posts, regardless of what science or credible research says.
B. I am now trolling because I have differing viewpoints than others and choose to share them. I will be told I'm entitled to my own opinions, yet point A states my opinion doesn't count as much as people with higher posts than me.

Oh, the conundrum!

If only everyone would just listen to me, they'd learn how to use CP, but I think you're starting to get it.

F1nut

And yet he digs another shovel full out of his hole. You're doing a swell job, keep it up.

Cpyder

Cogito wrote: »

Can we completely rule out the placebo effect

F1nut wrote: »

For me, absolutely.

Please answer this as honestly and straight forward as possible.

Let's say your demoing two different amplifiers. One costs $500 and is considered just okay, and the other costs $10,000 and all the reviewers say it's the bees knees. So you hook them up and begin flipping between them. You hear very noticeable differences. You even go so far as to write up a review on CP proclaiming that the more expensive one improved the soundstage, makes your music airier, more articulate and detailed, etc. You continue to flip back and forth and continue to hear these massive differences.

Now, let's say your friend came over and accidentally placed his coat on top of the two amplifiers, and you don't remember which one was plugged in last. What sort of insight did seeing the brand name a few minutes prior give you? Why can you no longer say if this amp is the more detailed one? Or the one that you just said makes the soundstage unarguably more defined. No one is pressuring you to make a snap decision. There's no tester in the room making you nervous. You have all day to decide if this amp is the better of the two. These massive differences that you just wrote about are no longer apparent. Why is this?

Is this example demonstrating the placebo effect in it's perfect form? Is expectational bias slapping you in the face? Is it possible that seeing the more expensive and "better" amp was plugged in instead of the cheaper one made you look harder for differences and made you expect them because you were sure they had to be there. I mean, it's a really great amp! And the cheaper, "worse" one couldn't possibly compete with it...... right?

Or is something happening when your friends jacket blocked the brand name from your sight that I didn't cover or mention?

F1nut

Now, let's say your friend came over and accidentally placed his coat on top of the two amplifiers

He and his coat would be out the effing door so fast you couldn't photograph it.

Why is this?

It isn't. What don't you understand about that?

F1nut

Keiko wrote: »

I think he's hysterical, Jesse.



:rolleyes:

Well, there is that, Mike.

Cpyder

heiney9 wrote: »

6 moons has been a bit more accurate in their reviews than most. They do tend to "romanticize" many of the products they review and get a tad artsy fartsy sometimes with long winded descriptions, but if you look at the overall review and the conclusions they are pretty close most of the time; not always and not perfect, but not horrible.

H9

P.s. Audioholics needs to take a 12 step program and stop reviewing audio, say no to reviews

You say the reviews aren't horrible, so please comment on this conclusion taken from 6moons review on the Machina Dynaica Intelligent Box:

"Audible results are very good and it is hard to listen to a non-treated disc after listening to an enhanced version of that same disc on any CDP.... Because we still have no 100% explanation for how these light treatments work on the physical disc itself, we will keep searching for that elusive answer. In the meantime, zap away. That part isn't in question at all."

The fact that they reviewed this product and gave generally favorable reviews severely hinders there reputation as a professional audio reviewer. In fact, replace "gave generally favorable reviews" with "said the product actually does a damn thing" for an even greater effect. "Hard to listen to a non-treated disc after listening to an enhanced version"? - Seriously? Wow! This sentence is just amazing. A+ work. They really do know their ****!

How do these comments not blow any credibility out of the water for you? I mean, if they can write this, how can you trust any of their other articles?

Source: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/machinadynamica2/ib.html

Cpyder

F1nut wrote: »

He and his coat would be out the effing door so fast you couldn't photograph it.



It isn't. What don't you understand about that?

Really? Not even going to address the question asked to you? Get trumped! You're an idiot.

F1nut

Cpyder wrote: »

Really? Not even going to address the question asked to you? Get trumped! You're an idiot.

I already answered the question. Obviously, you're not smart enough to realize it. Game over, you lost.

BlueFox

Cpyder wrote: »

Now, let's say your friend came over and accidentally placed his coat on top of the two amplifiers, and you don't remember which one was plugged in last. What sort of insight did seeing the brand name a few minutes prior give you? Why can you no longer say if this amp is the more detailed one? Or the one that you just said makes the soundstage unarguably more defined. No one is pressuring you to make a snap decision. There's no tester in the room making you nervous. You have all day to decide if this amp is the better of the two. These massive differences that you just wrote about are no longer apparent. Why is this?

This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read (at least tonight). You just made up a completely fictional scenario with fictional results, and you want to know why your fictional results occurred?

Wow!

Maybe they occurred because you apparently have no ability to tell the difference between the real world and a fictional world.

To answer your question, I think the one with the coat over it sounds better, since it lowered the vibration resonance of the audible frequencies. Duh! Plus, since this is all fantasy, there is a stunning, statuesque, nude, Japanese beauty standing next to the coat saying “This is best.”

hearingimpared

Cpyder wrote: »

Please answer this as honestly and straight forward as possible.

Let's say your demoing two different amplifiers. One costs $500 and is considered just okay, and the other costs $10,000 and all the reviewers say it's the bees knees. So you hook them up and begin flipping between them. You hear very noticeable differences. You even go so far as to write up a review on CP proclaiming that the more expensive one improved the soundstage, makes your music airier, more articulate and detailed, etc. You continue to flip back and forth and continue to hear these massive differences.

Now, let's say your friend came over and accidentally placed his coat on top of the two amplifiers, and you don't remember which one was plugged in last. What sort of insight did seeing the brand name a few minutes prior give you? Why can you no longer say if this amp is the more detailed one? Or the one that you just said makes the soundstage unarguably more defined. No one is pressuring you to make a snap decision. There's no tester in the room making you nervous. You have all day to decide if this amp is the better of the two. These massive differences that you just wrote about are no longer apparent. Why is this?

Is this example demonstrating the placebo effect in it's perfect form? Is expectational bias slapping you in the face? Is it possible that seeing the more expensive and "better" amp was plugged in instead of the cheaper one made you look harder for differences and made you expect them because you were sure they had to be there. I mean, it's a really great amp! And the cheaper, "worse" one couldn't possibly compete with it...... right?

Or is something happening when your friends jacket blocked the brand name from your sight that I didn't cover or mention?

LSD & reefer kills brain cells . . . the above is a perfect example.

Cogito

F1nut wrote: »

Well, you're either a troll or ignorant and maybe both.

I see how it is... If someone doesn't agree with you, we call them names and TRY to demean them rather than debating the subject at hand and making a sensible argument. It's okay though, as I see it in politics all the time. Either be good little sheep, or it's off to the slaughter house.

Cogito

BlueFox wrote: »

Yes.

I have to admit I do feel a little sorry for those whose hearing is so poor they cannot hear obvious differences. But I have no sympathy for those whose minds are so rigid they cannot accept the fact that we do yet completely understand either the physical universe, or human biology.

The Placebo effect has been extensively studied and a known fact and very much a part of "human biology". Do you deny this?

Cogito

F1nut wrote: »

For me, absolutely.

Careful now! Such claims could be indicative of a non-human state of mind...

inspiredsports

Jeez, I tried to give you a chance as perhaps having something to offer with your supposed 3 decades of experience, and this is what you offer? Coming soon . . . a longer ignore list.


PS: Sheesh, are Cogito, Cpyder and Jinjuku related?

Cogito

F1nut wrote: »

That may be a great way to find the cure for cancer, but it has no place in audio.

So in other words, we should forgo all objective criteria? I do agree, "how it sounds" is the MOST important factor above all. And yes, there are certainly differences in the way equipment "sounds". Some quite subtle and with loudspeakers, "night and day" obvious. But if you are going to tell me that putting a couple little wooden disks on top of your amplifier, using silver wired interconects rather than copper and putting the green marker to the edge of the CD suddenly opened up the sounstage, dramatically increased the dynamics and caused you to faint with orgasmic delight (Okay, I was a bit overboard on that one LOL), is it unreasonable for me to ask HOW this is happening and possibly demonstrate the differences (Double blind tests work well here)?

Cogito

inspiredsports wrote: »

Jeez, I tried to give you a chance as perhaps having something to offer with your supposed 3 decades of experience, and this is what you offer? Coming soon . . . a longer ignore list.


PS: Sheesh, are Cogito, Cpyder and Jinjuku related?

If ya can't debate the topic, you simply dismiss it. It's okay, we understand. Nobody's opinion or experience holds any merit unless it yours. After all, it's much easier to argue when everyone agrees. However, it makes for a boring conversation.

Happt listening!

Cogito

GV#27 wrote: »

Welcome to CP and I prefer Armour all over the green ink;)

Oh, I haven't tried that yet! Audio nirvana, here I come!

inspiredsports

Cogito wrote: »

If ya can't debate the topic, you simply dismiss it. It's okay, we understand. Nobody's opinion or experience holds any merit unless it yours. After all, it's much easier to argue when everyone agrees. However, it makes for a boring conversation.

Happt listening!

I guess you missed my post #151 directly to you late last night. Just chill a bit and get to know the terrain before you start throwing bombs.

Happy listening!

heiney9

Cpyder wrote: »

Now you're getting it! But seriously, you're pretty much right. I don't like it but it happens a lot. Also, I do think some people correlate number of posts with credibility, which is also a fallacy.

Here's a demonstration for you:

I don't feel that an extremely exotic, expensive power cord can do anything beneficial to the electricity delivered by 100 miles of standard quality power line from outside your house. You need some sort of filter to accomplish this. This view, contradicts with some of the people with the highest posts around here.

So -
A. My opinion doesn't count as much because I only have a couple hundred posts, regardless of what science or credible research says.
B. I am now trolling because I have differing viewpoints than others and choose to share them. I will be told I'm entitled to my own opinions, yet point A states my opinion doesn't count as much as people with higher posts than me.

Oh, the conundrum!

If only everyone would just listen to me, they'd learn how to use CP, but I think you're starting to get it.

You're too much of a noob to remember a certain member "candylicker" he had about 5K post if I remember right............he was/is a crackpot that hardly anyone listened to or respected his opinion because most of the time he was on another planet. So that takes care of your theory...............time to come up with another one.

WilliamM2

For example, we know that different speaker wires have different electrical characteristics. This is measureable. We know the electrical characteristics of the wire will affect the signal traveling over the wire, affect the source of the signal, and affect the destination of the signal. All of this will produce a sonic signature unique to that combination of electronics, wire, and speaker.

Problem is, all the measurements so far show that the difference is well below the threshold of human hearing. Or maybe you can produce some measurements that show otherwise?

Yet, they are people whose minds are so rigid they cannot accept these simple basic, physical principles.

They call themselves audiophiles.

heiney9

Cogito wrote: »

Careful now! Such claims could be indicative of a non-human state of mind...

Cogito wrote: »

The Placebo effect has been extensively studied and a known fact and very much a part of "human biology". Do you deny this?

Cogito wrote: »

I see how it is... If someone doesn't agree with you, we call them names and TRY to demean them rather than debating the subject at hand and making a sensible argument. It's okay though, as I see it in politics all the time. Either be good little sheep, or it's off to the slaughter house.

Guess I was right and all it took was your first singular post. Jumped right in the fray and started stirring the pot, great way to be welcomed here. :rolleyes:

concealer404

Cogito wrote: »

So in other words, we should forgo all objective criteria? I do agree, "how it sounds" is the MOST important factor above all. And yes, there are certainly differences in the way equipment "sounds". Some quite subtle and with loudspeakers, "night and day" obvious. But if you are going to tell me that putting a couple little wooden disks on top of your amplifier, using silver wired interconects rather than copper and putting the green marker to the edge of the CD suddenly opened up the sounstage, dramatically increased the dynamics and caused you to faint with orgasmic delight (Okay, I was a bit overboard on that one LOL), is it unreasonable for me to ask HOW this is happening and possibly demonstrate the differences (Double blind tests work well here)?

It's definitely not unreasonable to ask how. But it IS unreasonable, when there's no scientific reason how and why it happened, to then change your mind and decide that it didn't happen.

My tone deaf, happy with her laptop computer speakers girlfriend can tell the INSTANT i swap anything out on the stereo. She'll come home and say "Something sounds different, what did you do?"

CoolJazz

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Problem is, all the measurements so far show that the difference is well below the threshold of human hearing. Or maybe you can produce some measurements that show otherwise?

Bolded type in quote added.

So if measurements show its below the threshold, then how to explain that its so easy to hear? The obvious answer is that your measuring the wrong thing the wrong way!!

You see, if you take the cable out of the circuit that it's used in and simply measure RLC, then you miss that the cable isn't a one way device! All the anomolies created at the speaker system crossover and the back EMF get picked up by the typical amps feedback loop and injected right back into the amplifier. So phase shifts (this means timing changes!) from wildly swinging impedance shifts get filtered through the resistance and the shoved right back in to be re-amplified!

Lots of room for things to be happening beyond the mystery of that stand alone measurement that you can't seem to (or more likely don't want to) explain why it impacts things!!

CoolJazz

shack

Same song - different verse. :rolleyes:

New posters show up to help us poor misguided "audio junkies" understand the nuances of this hobby that we have somehow overlooked in our audio journey...armed with vast internet resources to prove the error of our ways.

Have I mentioned that "I don't care"?

Carry on.