Fake EE Degree [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Fake EE Degree



bo130
01-21-2004, 06:57 PM
Has anyone considered the possibility that there are contributors on this forum who claim that they have EE's, when they really don't? I still find this one of the most humorous aspects to this forum, as if their EE's make them somehow an "authority".

Whenever I hear the claims of someone having an EE degree, which are quickly followed by babbling of past technobabbled experiences (which are probably 100% fake as well), I immediately feel like skipping along to other cable discussions that don't contain these sort of claims.

Just food for thought.

mtrycraft
01-21-2004, 07:53 PM
Has anyone considered the possibility that there are contributors on this forum who claim that they have EE's, when they really don't? I still find this one of the most humorous aspects to this forum, as if their EE's make them somehow an "authority".

Whenever I hear the claims of someone having an EE degree, which are quickly followed by babbling of past technobabbled experiences (which are probably 100% fake as well), I immediately feel like skipping along to other cable discussions that don't contain these sort of claims.

Just food for thought.


Interesting supposition on your part. Anyone can claim anything on the net, do you disagree?
One way to find out if they have a fake degree. Put them to the test. Ask them something about electricity that an EE would know that you also know to refute it if it is wrong.
Isn't everything on the net or on the audio boards just babbling?
How do we know who you are?
Do we really care?

bturk667
01-21-2004, 08:05 PM
The only thing I would say is trust your ears over any advice given on this board, or any other for that matter!

Rockwell
01-21-2004, 08:36 PM
The only thing I would say is never trust your ears! Your ears any other sense can easily be fooled, so put them to the test and arm yourself with knowledge.

As for the fake EE thing, some of the regulars have been here for years, and I am fairly certain several of them are legitimate experts(though, I don't claim to be one in electronics, anyway) and would spot and call a fake pretty quickly. I guess that is more than one thing...shucks :(

okiemax
01-21-2004, 09:15 PM
Has anyone considered the possibility that there are contributors on this forum who claim that they have EE's, when they really don't? I still find this one of the most humorous aspects to this forum, as if their EE's make them somehow an "authority".

Whenever I hear the claims of someone having an EE degree, which are quickly followed by babbling of past technobabbled experiences (which are probably 100% fake as well), I immediately feel like skipping along to other cable discussions that don't contain these sort of claims.

Just food for thought.


Because anyone can misrepresent himself on the Cable Forum, I never pay much attention to what a person says about his background of education and experience. I judge a post based on how well the member presents and backs up his argument. I don't have technical training in electronics, so I am not qualified to judge expertise in this field. When a poster seems to be demonstrating his technical knowledge, I just figure he probably is right or some other member would correct him. However, when someone claims or implies they know everything that can and will be known about cables, I begin to doubt his qualifications.

Chuck
01-22-2004, 12:23 AM
Has anyone considered the possibility that there are contributors on this forum who claim that they have EE's, when they really don't? I still find this one of the most humorous aspects to this forum, as if their EE's make them somehow an "authority".

Whenever I hear the claims of someone having an EE degree, which are quickly followed by babbling of past technobabbled experiences (which are probably 100% fake as well), I immediately feel like skipping along to other cable discussions that don't contain these sort of claims.

Just food for thought.

Beyond the lying, it is unethical to claim a profession falsely. If the person is fluent in the field they might fool everyone, including others in the field. On the other hand, incompetence doesn't necessarily mean that one does not work as a professional. Some professionals are so incompetent that it is hard to believe that they ever managed to get a degree. A degree insures neither competence nor honesty.

As a result it is probably best just to take each persons points and posts on their own merits. Give claims of experience and/or education all the weight they merit. (I'd suggest something lighter than air.) :)

skeptic
01-22-2004, 05:44 AM
Has anyone considered the possibility that there are contributors on this forum who claim that they have EE's, when they really don't? I still find this one of the most humorous aspects to this forum, as if their EE's make them somehow an "authority".


I find it strange that on your second post on this site you are already challenging people who have posted here far longer and made far more contributions to other peoples' real knowledge than you probably ever will.

I generally avoid mentioning my background, especially my educational background because I think that the arguements should stand on their own merits and that people who read them should make their decisions of whether or not to believe them based on their logic and their own experience.

That having been said, I will say that I do NOT have an EE degree. I personally have a BE (Bachelor's of Engineering) degree which I received from Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken New Jersey in 1969. I majored in Electrical Engineering. I graduated 108 in a class of about 240 with a GPA of 2.85. Stevens offered only two undergraduate degrees at that time, Bachelor of Engineering and Bachelor of Science. They had what they called a "Unified Curriculum" which meant slightly fewer courses in the student's major discipline and slightly more in other engineering disciplines. The philosophy of this was that the education would be less likely to become obsolete and be of greater use over the lifetime of the student. This is a fine distinction but nonetheless I feel it should be stated.

Engineering grads really begin to pay their dues and become full fledged engineers after they leave school and start accumulating real world experience in the working world where they integrate their theoretical knowledge of the classroom with the practical knowledge of real life. It takes at least five years for most engineering students to become full fledged engineers. Some never make it and I've known many who even had PE licenses who had little or no useful engineering knowledge relying on other people to do their work for them. Others go into other fields right out of college including law school, medicine, business, or get jobs in sales or management and never become true engineers.

Engineering and scientific educations are different from say a Bachelor of Arts education. While BA students read history, english literature, sociology and then parrot back what they read to the professor in exams, usually in the form he wants, get their credits, and eventually their degrees, Engineers read development of mathematical models of physical situations in physics, chemistry, material science, electrical and mechanical studies and use them to solve problems. And while they inevitably forget much of what they knew in college, the way of thinking about problem solving stays with them for life so that when they need to, they can teach themselves whatever is new that they have to learn. In other words, BA students are taught what to think, engineers are taught HOW to think.

Do frauds, shills, wanabees and other fakers come here to post? Yes. I exposed one would be engineer here who misrepresented himself about two years ago. Anybody remember what happened to WarrenWarren? He claimed to be a candidate for a PHD in rf engineering until I pointed out in the course of one thread that he had made an error saying that the mathematical model of twisted pair wire was the same as coax. He then admitted he was in fact a technician, blabbered on about his wonderful job, his family, wrote a long thread on flipping coins and disappeared.

I do not know if John Risch is a degreed engineer. There are many troubling and puzzling things he says and does which make me wonder. I'm not going into them now but usually one engineer has a nose to sniff out another of his own kind. For instance, I have no doubt that John Neutron was trained as an electrical engineer or in some closely allied field such as physics. Engineers inevitably become skeptics early on in their careers after being taken in a few times by false advertising and misleading claims when their supervisors remind them that they are responsible for the wise use of other peoples' money. After that, they instinctively demand scientific proof of claims by independent testers whose results can be verified and always hold all conclusions as tentative. That's one big difference between engineering and religion. That's what makes me a maysayer and not a naysayer.

OK BO130 you got your answer. I hope you are satisfied.

Bill L
01-22-2004, 07:45 AM
What a system sounds like is all that matters. Anyone who quotes physics to pass judgement on you or your system IMO can't accept the truth (No-one knows everything about anything).

skeptic
01-22-2004, 07:50 AM
Some people have the knowledge and experience to see through other peoples' deceit. There is a lot of deception in this business because there is a lot of money to be made in it. It is very easy to be fooled. If you don't think so, you are even more vulnerable than you know.

Bill L
01-22-2004, 10:16 AM
I agree wholeheartedly. Where we differ is in our definition of knowledge and experience. IMO asking someone to evaluate a stereo without using their ears is ludicrous, yet it happens here daily. Why should we blindly accept anyone's opinion when we can see (hear) for ourselves, regardless of what that opinion is based on? It is much more likely that the extremely vocal naysaying few have flawed systems that do not allow the effect of cables to be heard, than it is that the entire audiophile community is self hypnotized into a placebo epidemic. $.02

skeptic
01-22-2004, 11:13 AM
It was obvious why the original poster bo130 said what he did. I answered him in a straightforward way as if his posting was a simple direct statement taken a face value but the real purpose of his posting seemed to me was to discredit people who brought any real knowledge to this board and who don't agree that upmarket cables make an audible improvement in audio systems. In other words, he is likely a shill for someone.

Those of us who have been around in this industry whether as pros or as hobbyists for any time know that there are an infinite number of clever ways to trick people into believing something about some piece or kind of equipment or other. How do we know? We've been tricked many times ourselves. My favorite was the Little David, a speaker marketed by Phillips in the 1970s. And a clever trick it was too. It was at a trade show. Two monster speakers were set up in a large room. They were playing jazz. Loud. Big sound just like the sound you'd expect from a gigantic multiway horn system. Dozens of people were crowded in listening to them. When the presenter started to talk about Phillip's new offering, at one point he turned on the lights inside the enclosures. It revealed to everyone's astonishment including mine that the enclosures were nothing more than empty frames with cloth around them. The actual speakers were very small, tiramplified bookshelf speakers. I have a friend who owns the original demos in his collection. This is just one example. There are countless others, most of them with far more malevolent intent. Even scientists can make honest mistakes as evidenced by the demo some Japanese experimenters published last year that was cited on this board. They demonstrated what they knew to be impossible was true, that you could hear harmonics above 20khz. When they realized and corrected their error (a tweeter covering both the audible and ultrasonic range producing harmonic distortion in the audible range when excited in the ultrasonic range) they got the right answer. The point is that to make a credible claim and convince professionals that they are valid, you MUST publish you complete experimental method and hold it up to scrutiny of other people of equal skill so that they can review it and shoot it down if possible. The audiophile cable industry didn't do this. Having produced products much more expensive than those they replaced, it was incumbent ON THEM, to prove their merit, not on the industry to prove they had none. For the longest while it seemed obvious that they didn't because they apparantly couldn't. But now it is also obvious from their commercial success that they don't have to. Audiophiles are willing to buy them and accept their worth often sight unseen and unheard. But even if they do prove that they work differently then their more mundane competitors, that is not enough to satisfy engineers who need to know how to know what they will do in advance (not as tinkering experimenters with unlimited time and money to try anything) and to know that what they have to offer is unique and cost effective. This is why engineers have a built in advantage over non engineers in gaging the validity of the increasingly brazen claims the people who make and sell this stuff publish.

This board offers neophite audiophiles the opportunity to question not only which cables to buy but the validity of the notion that they have to buy anything out of the ordinary at all. Other sites such as Cable Asylum take it for granted that upmarket cables are a necessary part of a fine home sound system and do not permit discussion of one important type of test, the Double Blind ABX test (DBT) which is a method scientists have of eliminating prejudice when trying to compare different equipment.

It is not the people who are skeptical like me who engage in technobabble about audio cables, it is the people who make and sell them, trying to impress and confuse their prospective customers intimidating or scaring them into believing that they won't get all of the performance they paid for in their other equipment if they don't buy these products. It is sad when someone with $500 to $1000 trying to put together his first home HT system or stereo system has been persuaded to shell out another few hundred for cables. Those people who are convinced that they must have these products will NOT be persuaded by objective facts that they might be wrong. But they will not go unchallenged if they bring their unsupported claims here either. Meanwhile, after reading PC Tower's notes from the recent CES show, it is clear that whether anyone in the industry believes in them or not, you are not going to successfully market high end audio equipment without impressive looking after market cables in their demo installation because that is what audiophiles expect to see.

Swerd
01-22-2004, 11:55 AM
Thanks for such a thoughtful & well worded response. I am always surprised at how many people there are, regardless of their education, who lack the basic skills of skeptical thinking. Look at how many on this forum misunderstand Mytrycraft's basic (some would say only) point. He'll believe whatever you claim, but first you have to convince him with some evidence.

Chuck
01-22-2004, 12:05 PM
Bill, do you really believe that if I disagree with you on something like wire-sonics or amplifier-signatures that you can conclude that I'm a stupid jerk with either crummy gear or defective hearing? Don't you think you might just be jumping to an unsupportable conclusion? It seems that you may be letting your imagination rule your thinking. NOBODY has EVER told anyone to select audio gear without listening to it. OK, that's probably an overstatement, but only a complete idiot would give that kind of advice, and complete idiots are (thankfully) rare. You seem to imagine that people are saying that constantly on this forum so I challenge you to provide some links to support your claim. I think if you look for such advice you'll actually find that it is something that you have only imagined. If I'm wrong about that we'll just blame it on my not reading enough posts. :)

I totally agree that most if not all disagreements are the result of the way we define things and our experiences, but jumping to the kind of conclusions you're jumping to here is difficult to justify. For what it's worth, there are people here who have outstanding audio systems, and not all of them are going to agree with you on every issue. If you lump them all together in a group you label as "naysayers" you make a major error. If you think there is something wrong with anyone who disagrees with you then you need to consider the implications of the thinking.

I see three camps. One says, "I know what I hear." The other says, "No you don't." The third group questions the cause of what is heard. It is easy to confuse the latter with either of the other two. When we do so we probably miss something worth knowing, but not everyone cares or needs to know (anything). If you like what you hear, and are comfortable with that level of assessment, then why worry about what others think or say? Just ignore it.

Chuck
01-22-2004, 12:18 PM
In other words, he is likely a shill for someone.

That is an ASTRONOMICAL leap of faith for one who considers himself a skeptic. :)

mtrycraft
01-22-2004, 12:46 PM
The only thing I would say is trust your ears over any advice given on this board, or any other for that matter!

Big mistake based on what we know about human gullibility and how easy it is to confuse senses.

mtrycraft
01-22-2004, 12:52 PM
Interesting you are using the same picture, or it seems to be, under you name as a poster at DIY from Australia :)

mtrycraft
01-22-2004, 12:57 PM
I do not know if John Risch is a degreed engineer. There are many troubling and puzzling things he says and does which make me wonder.

He was presented as having an EE at the 1998 AES conference at his presentation of one of his papers. I sat through it. Boring.

mtrycraft
01-22-2004, 01:01 PM
What a system sounds like is all that matters.

Well, this can be debated as well. How a system sounds to you is also determined by your biases. Dr Floyd Toole has demonstrated this many times.


Anyone who quotes physics to pass judgement on you or your system IMO can't accept the truth (No-one knows everything about anything).

What truths would that be? Who said one needs to know everythign aby anything?
One only has to look around you.

mtrycraft
01-22-2004, 01:05 PM
It is much more likely that the extremely vocal naysaying few have flawed systems that do not allow the effect of cables to be heard, than it is that the entire audiophile community is self hypnotized into a placebo epidemic. $.02

When you or anyone for that matter can demonstarte this audible differences, then I could agree with you about flawed systems. Or, ones hearing capability. But, that is not what the debate is about. It is about the claimants ability to demonstrate the accuracy of the claims made.

Swerd
01-22-2004, 01:15 PM
Interesting you are using the same picture, or it seems to be, under you name as a poster at DIY from Australia :)
Is that the DIY board here, or on another site? If its another site, he is an interloper, but one with good taste!

skeptic
01-22-2004, 01:22 PM
This was only his second posting at this web site and he has already questioned the credentials of people who post here who claim or appear to be engineers. Why would he do that? If the answer isn't obvious to you, ask it again and again until you get the right answer. Do not stop if you are starting to get a headache. It may hurt but it will be worth it when the truth finally dawns on you.

okiemax
01-22-2004, 01:30 PM
Thanks for such a thoughtful & well worded response. I am always surprised at how many people there are, regardless of their education, who lack the basic skills of skeptical thinking. Look at how many on this forum misunderstand Mytrycraft's basic (some would say only) point. He'll believe whatever you claim, but first you have to convince him with some evidence.

Convince him with some evidence? How would you do that here? If I say I got a positive result from a blinded test of a cable at home, I doubt anyone would accept that as proof of a difference. Naysayers might suspect I made it up or did something wrong.

Chuck
01-22-2004, 01:55 PM
Big mistake based on what we know about human gullibility and how easy it is to confuse senses.

You overlook some of the most important factors. "Big mistake." :)

People have to have some basis for any decision. Are you actually advising the purchase of audio equipment without listening to it first. If so all I can say is that it is the most idiotic idea every proposed on this or any other audio forum.

Exactly WHAT do you expect people to do, Mtry? Is everyone supposed to get an EE degree before they purchase audio equipment? Your position is totally unsupportable, in spite of the fallibility of our senses. We all, including you, have to make decisions based on the best information we have available. When it comes to audio, all most people have is their ears. I didn't realize that you were the extremist who thinks a pig in a poke is better than using the best information we have available. I'm shocked!

Me thinks perhaps your words here don't actually reflect your thinking. If they do, then you might want to consider trying to find another hobby. :)

What makes you think your advice is going to lead to greater end-user satisfaction than anyone else's advice? The whole idea of buying audio gear based on the advice of someone else is totally misguided. Hell man, if we do that, we'll all be buying exotic cables, becuae the reviewers love them so much. Big mistake! :)

Chuck
01-22-2004, 02:06 PM
What a system sounds like is all that matters.

Well, this can be debated as well. How a system sounds to you is also determined by your biases. Dr Floyd Toole has demonstrated this many times.


If you're speaking of Toole's work that shows that most people prefer low distortion and linear frequency response I think you are making too much out of it. He has never shown that everybody has the same preferences because that just can't be shown. It isn't true.

Some find close micing objectionable. Dr. Bose was one such person, and there are still people who love the diffuse and directionless quality of his direct-reflecting 901 loudspeakers. There are at least as many who think them unlistenable, and Dr. Toole's work supports that position. This does not in any way limit the pleasure 901 owners have received and will continue to receive from their loudspeakers. Toole's work doesn't show what you imply that it shows in your statements here. It does verify something you and I have discussed before, that being that MOST prefer low distortion and linear response (once they have a chance to actually hear such things), but that doesn't preclude alternate preferences. Thanking that way is like thinking that any music you don't personally enjoy is just trash. It's fuzzy thinking and rather self-centered. Don't you agree?

Swerd
01-22-2004, 02:11 PM
If I say I got a positive result from a blinded test of a cable at home, I doubt anyone would accept that as proof of a difference. Naysayers might suspect I made it up or did something wrong.
If you did such a test, provided everyone a full description of your methods, and showed all the results, naysayers might falsely accuse you of making it up, but genuine skeptics would eagerly read it. They might come back with a lot of questions, and they might not agree with your conclusions, but I think you would be surprised at how skeptics can be convinced by a well-done experiment or demonstration. Skeptics really mean it when they say "Show me".

Chuck
01-22-2004, 02:45 PM
This was only his second posting at this web site and he has already questioned the credentials of people who post here who claim or appear to be engineers. Why would he do that? If the answer isn't obvious to you, ask it again and again until you get the right answer. Do not stop if you are starting to get a headache. It may hurt but it will be worth it when the truth finally dawns on you.

Your own words here show your skills at making objective skeptical judgements, so there is nothing left to discuss. You apparently need a reality check, so we'll check in with Mtrycraft. Let's you and I just let it drop and let Mtry have his say. We both agree that he will be objective, right?

MTRYCRAFTS: Do you think that there is only one possibility, as Skeptic has asserted, or do you think that his thinking comes form some kind of paranoid delusion? Aren't there other, more likely, explinations than the guy being a shill?
I’d explain a few to Skeptic but it seems that his mind is closed; Guess that means he’s using a misleading moniker. Do you agree?
Thanks in advance Mtry, I know you'll be unbiased and objective, even if Skeptic can't quite manage to follow your example.

Bill L
01-22-2004, 03:46 PM
Chuck - Stupid jerk? Crummy gear? Umm.. I don't recall using those phrases. When I say people would have me buy gear without listening to it I'm referring to the Placebo Effect. OK, maybe I should have said people are telling us to listen to the gear and ignore anything we hear that is different from what they hear - it's our imagination if we don't agree with their assessment. That's what placebo boils down to on this board. My point is, placebo means you can't trust your ears to judge the merit of an AUDIO component! Call me crazy but that sounds absurd to me.

Rockwell
01-22-2004, 04:47 PM
You overlook some of the most important factors. "Big mistake." :)

People have to have some basis for any decision. Are you actually advising the purchase of audio equipment without listening to it first. If so all I can say is that it is the most idiotic idea every proposed on this or any other audio forum.

Exactly WHAT do you expect people to do, Mtry? Is everyone supposed to get an EE degree before they purchase audio equipment? Your position is totally unsupportable, in spite of the fallibility of our senses. We all, including you, have to make decisions based on the best information we have available. When it comes to audio, all most people have is their ears. I didn't realize that you were the extremist who thinks a pig in a poke is better than using the best information we have available. I'm shocked!

Me thinks perhaps your words here don't actually reflect your thinking. If they do, then you might want to consider trying to find another hobby. :)

What makes you think your advice is going to lead to greater end-user satisfaction than anyone else's advice? The whole idea of buying audio gear based on the advice of someone else is totally misguided. Hell man, if we do that, we'll all be buying exotic cables, becuae the reviewers love them so much. Big mistake! :)

I think what he is saying is that some things are worth listening to and some aren't. For the things that aren't, like wires that are unlikely to change the sound, the buyer may want to use more rigorous testing or avoid auditioning them all together. Of course, it is up to the buyer to decide what is worth listening to, but I think that most people assume or are told that wires will make their system better. I would take the advice of an engineer over some salesman or wire evangelist on what is likely to improve sound.

What cemented my own conclusons about the flawed nature of wire sonics are the reviews and comparisons of digital cables, cables which cannot impart any signature, but people can still imagine them.

skeptic
01-22-2004, 08:33 PM
I think what he is saying is that some things are worth listening to and some aren't. For the things that aren't, like wires that are unlikely to change the sound, the buyer may want to use more rigorous testing or avoid auditioning them all together.

Among those few I've encountered who can be taken seriously about the benefit of certain wires, they admit that the improvements are at best subtle. But how many times do you hear people say this wire blew away all of the others or that there was a drastic improvement. Even Jon Risch tells you that you require what he conceives as a high resolution sound system to hear the benefits of these wires yet people whose entire sound systems cost merely a few thousand dollars are spending hundreds on these wires. How did they get the idea that they were worth it? When you read the scientific measurements and the discussion gets down to a few tenths of a decibel at 20khz, you are in a zone well beyond the threshold of what human beings can hear and distinguish. People who have an absolutist mentality with some idealized conception of what audio equipment is about are not in the real world. They think that somehow, if every component achieved its theoretical optimum, there would be perfection in sound reproduction. This ignores the truth which is that the very concept or paradyme is badly flawed and that there is a point of diminishing returns and a point of no returns and any so called improvements are an illusion.

Chuck
01-22-2004, 11:18 PM
Hi Bill,


Chuck - Stupid jerk? Crummy gear? Umm.. I don't recall using those phrases.

You didn't. I don't recall anyone saying that you did. :)
My intent was simply to provide an example of the kind of things many people say when someone disagrees with the things they know or believe related to audio. Sorry if I seemed to be accusing you of saying something you didn't say. It's just that it is what so many say when they visit this forum and come across people who disagree with them. Actually, we hear the very same thing on every audio forum, so it's not correct to single-out AR Cable. It was an example of the way close-minded extremists often behave. Another example can be found in this thread, and it's an example that comes from the other side of the fence. I can't believe that there is a regular here who will attack some one as a shill after only two posts, without anything to indicate that they are indeed a shill, and treat me like a fool when I try to point out their error. That's actually a better example, but when I wrote the last post it hadn't happened yet.

Let me quote the rest of your response before I say any more.


When I say people would have me buy gear without listening to it I'm referring to the Placebo Effect. OK, maybe I should have said people are telling us to listen to the gear and ignore anything we hear that is different from what they hear - it's our imagination if we don't agree with their assessment. That's what placebo boils down to on this board. My point is, placebo means you can't trust your ears to judge the merit of an AUDIO component! Call me crazy but that sounds absurd to me.

No, I won't call you crazy. In fact, I believe I understand how you feel, and why you feel that way. You may even be right. I'm just not ready to conclude that everyone on this forum is a jerk, if for no other reason than that I know a few of the people and they aren't jerks or extremists. Let me tell you what I think is at the root of most of the mean spirited posting we see on audio forums. Then you (and everyone else) can call me crazy. :)

Things first go bad when someone jumps to an erroneous conclusion regarding someone else. Just look what happens. Some poor guy has finally purchased a high-end audio system after years of reading the audio magazines and day-dreaming. He upgrades his cables, and what he hears blows him away. It doesn't matter one twit for our purposes here whether or not what he heard was due to the cable upgrade or some other factor (perhaps the room was drier and his ESL panels had more output, improving the systems frequency response, or perhaps it was the interconnects, but the guy swapped the cables and heard a difference FOR SOME REASON. If he is inquisitive he may go to the Web and pick up all manner of wire facts and hype, but since he is looking for an explanation of something he's experienced he is unlikely to pay attention to anything that doesn't seem to help answer the "mystery." He may pick up a long list of buzz words, and is likely to feel that he has a good grasp of the topic. Now he may well have a good grasp, but what are the odds? Out of all the theories being thrown about, what are the odds that he'll pick the one that happens to be correct (or the most correct)? If he comes to this forum and relates his experience he will be accused of being a shill for the cable companies, and he will probably go away thinking that this forum is populated by idiots. Would you blame him? Anyone with one eye and half-a-brain can see that wire and interconnect consumers outnumber the shills by a factor of many to one. If the shills were the only ones to buy into the wire theories then there wouldn't be any customers to buy the product. So on that basis alone even a fool can see that most who post such experiences are NOT going to be shills for some audio or cable company.

I could give you a list of people who have done substantial work and testing with alternate wire and cable configurations, and many of them have audio systems that are excellent by any standard (unless that standard is cost or value, the latter being something that is always debatable). The problem with providing such a list is that there are too many people who would see it as a list of tin-ears who are some kind of vermin, and some of the names on the list are well respected high-end audio designers. I will give you a few names, one being myself, and the other being Jneutron (John E.). Also Rod Elliott and GDS over at Audioholics. All except John have audiophile grade loudspeakers, and all have at one time or another been given a lot of crap for stating their findings and conclusions. Everyone I know who has looked into it in any depth at all has found exactly the same thing. Wire and interconnects can make a difference, but it is always subtle unless something is amiss, and it is rarely an improvement (in terms of accuracy). When there is an audible difference it has always been traced to less accuracy rather than more. As a result, I use relatively modest interconnects with relatively exotic associated equipment. By saying that, on any audio forum, I run the risk of some moron coming along and asserting that I'm either stupid, or simply can't hear the difference on my el-cheap-o Bose boom box. That is just as bad, in every way, as being told that you are a shill for the cable companies because you hear a difference when changing cables. It's stupid, and it's irritating, and it makes audio forums very unpleasant at times.

Bill, do you see what I'm trying to get at here? We should not have to agree on every issue to be able to have a civil discussion. Why do audio discussions so frequently deteriorate into name calling? Communication requires some effort on both ends, especially when the topic is something we're passionate about (like art, music, religion, or politics). If it weren't for the trouble makers we could probably discuss our differences in a rational way, but the disruptions tend to polarize everyone to one degree or another. People complain about the way they are treated here when they try to discuss their experiences with wire and interconnects. I get the same treatment over on AA Cable if I try to talk about my experiences, so all the audio forums are really the same. They're fun places as long as you can ignore the troublemakers.

In an effort to help Chris make this a better forum I've started reporting all obnoxious posts, and to help keep myself from getting upset over the most obnoxious posts I've started using the "blocked posters" list provided on this forum. If the idea catches on it won't be long before the most obnoxious contributors have only themselves to get nasty with.

What I'm trying to get you to see, Bill, is that even though you and I see much of this quite differently, I think we both feel the same way about the nasty way some treat others. It is contagious, because when we're abused we tend to get upset and this can lead us to add fuel to the fire. I've done it in the past but am trying to do better. Blocking certain posters will no doubt help. And Bill, what is to be gained by reading the drivel of guys who advise people to buy without listening, accuse consumers of being shills, and/or assume that anyone who disagrees with them is defective in some way.? I'm convinced that such people are best ignored. Do you agree?

Do you see that even though we may disagree on some things, we both get abused by some when we relate our experiences? If you do then I'm sure you understand why I say that I think I know how you feel.

See ya,

Chuck

Chuck
01-22-2004, 11:35 PM
I think what he is saying is that some things are worth listening to and some aren't. For the things that aren't, like wires that are unlikely to change the sound, the buyer may want to use more rigorous testing or avoid auditioning them all together. Of course, it is up to the buyer to decide what is worth listening to, but I think that most people assume or are told that wires will make their system better. I would take the advice of an engineer over some salesman or wire evangelist on what is likely to improve sound.

What cemented my own conclusons about the flawed nature of wire sonics are the reviews and comparisons of digital cables, cables which cannot impart any signature, but people can still imagine them.

Actually, he has now implied that I'm stupid because I don't believe that everyone who reports hearing differences in wires is a shill. The man is knowledgeable, but his perceptions of the motives of others is very skewed. Don't you agree? Cable consumers have to outnumber the shills, and guys who buy cables do so because they believe something they've seen in an ad or review. They believe they know what they're talking about, and will show up on audio forums to defend their decisions. On that basis it is totally irrational to believe that one can know after two posts that someone else is a shill. Do YOU think that the guys who post about their subjective experiences are shills, or do you agree with me on this matter. The issue is not the good points Skeptic made, but rather his jumping to an unsupportable conclusions about those who have posted here. That would include the comments he's made about me. Do YOU think I'm stupid because I don't think that every report of "cable sonics" comes from a shill? That is clearly what Skeptic thinks, just read his posts and see how stubborn he is about it, and how rude he has been with me. Is this your buddy? Can you make him listen to reason? I could sure use some help. :)

I appreciate your comments, but it does seem that you missed the point. Skeptic didn't, but stands by his half-baked conclusions. Surely he stands alone.

Thanks,

Chuck

skeptic
01-23-2004, 03:49 AM
Actually, he has now implied that I'm stupid because I don't believe that everyone who reports hearing differences in wires is a shill.

Not stupid Chuck. At least not in the sense you meant it. Gullable yes. Naive, yes. Egotistical yes. Unwilling to consider that people with more knowledge and experience than you have know how easy it is to be tricked in this business and that you probably have been had, yes. Stupid in that sense, yes. Stupid for not being more critical and demanding of proof that you are getting something of real value for your money, yes. But you stupid? Well, only if you don't learn from your mistakes.

"Cable consumers have to outnumber the shills, and guys who buy cables do so because they believe something they've seen in an ad or review. They believe they know what they're talking about, and will show up on audio forums to defend their decisions. "

Oh thank you so much for making this point for me Chuck. I couldn't have said it any better myself. They read the ads and articles and heard what the guy in the store had to say, convinced themselves that it was right, and in a few short minutes of listening were certain that they were buying their magic bullet. This is the perfect customer for these guys, the know-it-all who read a few ads, an article or two, and now is an expert. You can call this a ripple effect where just a few well placed shills can multiply the number of customers and sales manyfold. Kind of like a chain letter or pyramid scheme. And this is the true purpose of Cable Asylum as well. To start that snowball rolling down the hill and scooping up money all along the way.

As for a guy who on his second post is already challenging engineers because real knowledge is a threat to this scheme, there could hardly be any doubt. But to a know-it-all who only questions the obvious and gets tricked by every sleeze monkey who comes along, all I can say is good luck. Your first cable will not be your last. Nor your second. Nor your fifth. And if you have any money left over, after two or three dozen, you might just begin to think maybe the whole thing wasn't worth it. That is if your false pride and big ego can give way for even one second to allow in the thought that you might just be wrong and that you've been had. PC Tower is getting there. Not quite yet but after a few years here, he's almost heading in that direction. Fortunely as a successful attorney, all the money he looks back on that he wasted on worthless junk cables is just so much water under the bridge that he rarely thinks about. But then again he must consider what a difference it might have made had he taken that same money and bought a car, a cruise, or some other toy he passed up instead because he didn't want to shell out the cash at the time he wanted it. But I'm sure you have so much money, that thought will never cross your mind either.

skeptic
01-23-2004, 04:59 AM
"It doesn't matter one twit for our purposes here whether or not what he heard was due to the cable upgrade or some other factor"

On the contrary, that's all that matters Chuck. That's what we are discussing here. Whether all of the money and hype about cables has anything it it to do with the real world. In other words, MONEY.

You seem to have two standards. On the one hand, you are a Philadelphia lawyer argueing against the obvious that someone who has posted here twice and is ranting against the real knowledge of engineers isn't a shill and on the other taking the claims of people who make and sell audio cables at face value, not to be challenged and that it doesn't matter if the cables do anything, as long as it feels good owning them.

I don't think you're a shill. I think this is kind of like a relgious cult for you and you feel very uncomfortable being among the non believers who whill challenge the dogma you believe in at every turn.

"It's just that it is what so many say when they visit this forum and come across people who disagree with them. Actually, we hear the very same thing on every audio forum, so it's not correct to single-out AR Cable. It was an example of the way close-minded extremists often behave. "

You won't hear it at Cable Asylum. The owner Rod said several months ago his mission was to make Cable Asylum a forum where only positive experiences with cables are discussed. So if you are in a cult of believers, that will be a comfortable place. No non believers are allowed.

Am I a close minded extremist. ABSOLUTELY YES. I don't take baloney at face value. I demand proof when something someone tries to sell me makes no sense. And when they don't produce it but just hand out more baloney, I reject it. People who make decisions based on evidence and logic are close minded to fantasies. And to that I plead guilty as charged.

"Some poor guy has finally purchased a high-end audio system after years of reading the audio magazines and day-dreaming. He upgrades his cables, and what he hears blows him away. It doesn't matter one twit for our purposes here whether or not what he heard was due to the cable upgrade or some other factor "

That's exactly how they rope the suckers in. Getting inexperienced people with no real knowledge to daydream filling their heads with worthless fancies and fears so that they will budget some of their precious money for the contingency that the cable guys might be right. And when you hear the BIG LIE often enough and don't know any better, you begin to believe it.

"He may pick up a long list of buzz words, and is likely to feel that he has a good grasp of the topic. "

Isn't that how you came to believe in cables yourself Chuck?

"If the shills were the only ones to buy into the wire theories then there wouldn't be any customers to buy the product. So on that basis alone even a fool can see that most who post such experiences are NOT going to be shills for some audio or cable company."

Oh so true. Shills sell the product. It's their victims who buy it. I never called you a shill. You are the perfect victim. After enough time you easily can spot the difference. But the shill is the victim's guru and when you are a true believer as you are, you don't like seeing your idols knocked off their pedistals.

" could give you a list of people who have done substantial work and testing with alternate wire and cable configurations....and all have at one time or another been given a lot of crap for stating their findings and conclusions."

If their work does not conform to rigorous scientific methods that prove the validity of their conclusions to other scientists, not hobbyists who read ad copy and consumer articles, then they will get crap for it because their so called work is "crap." No they do not get the benefit of the doubt. Real science doesn't work that way.

"Everyone I know who has looked into it in any depth at all has found exactly the same thing. Wire and interconnects can make a difference,"

There is not one shred of published evidence which can be held to rigorous scientific scrutiny to suggest that this is true. A few tenths of a db at 20khz difference doesn't add up to a row of beans. At least not to a pro. I'll bet many of the people you cited here are in the business of selling cables and make money from it one way or another. Their testimony can hardly be considered objective or unbiased.

"In an effort to help Chris make this a better forum I've started reporting all obnoxious posts, and to help keep myself from getting upset over the most obnoxious posts I've started using the "blocked posters" list provided on this forum. "

So now you are the self apointed assistant censor expecting the site administrator to ban anybody who really challenges what you say or want to read. I am hardly even the least bit surprised. This is the same kind of tyranical mentality that I and others didn't put up with from Jon Risch. So he left and went to CA. You are too late. He already has the job of censor in chief there. But you won't be able to do much complaining about the people you don't like if you block their messages. Kind of self defeating. And kind of flying in the face of human nature. Most people want to hear what other people have to say about them and their ideas. Even if it isn't very flattering.

"Do you see that even though we may disagree on some things, we both get abused by some when we relate our experiences?"

If by abused you mean that your unsupported claims for the superiority of certain products will be challenged you are right. That's what we do here. Nobody gets a free pass to make illogical claims and then just fly away. Not at this site so far. That's what distinguishes it from CA which at least IMO is an electronic billboard for the cable industry.

BTW, with all of the back and forth, it might have escaped you that ob130 never posted a second time to even come back and deny that he is a shill. Why don't you write him an e-mail and ask him yourself? See what he has to say about it. This topic seems to trouble you far more than anybody else. As for abuse, when people who have spent the better part of a lifetime studying something using the full power of their brains are so openly and blatantly challenged as ob130 did, that might be considered abuse. Did that ever occur to you?

Bill L
01-23-2004, 07:44 AM
I didn't miss your point - it's been repeated here ad nauseum. "If I can't here it then nobody can" and "Prove it, prove it, prove it or you have a placebo problem". There's your unsupported claim. Placebo effect exists and can influence people - but not to the extent that is suggested here, as a blanket win-all-arguments finality that supposes everyone who believes in cable sonics is afflicted. It's a witch hunt.

skeptic
01-23-2004, 11:11 AM
It's a witch hunt.

Can you explain why after about 30 years since these products first appeared on the market, not one manufacturer of the countless dozens or even hundreds of different companies and thousands of different models has ever once demonstrated through a fair double blind test that their products are in any way different in their audible performance let alone proven that they are better? I'll give you two reasons then. 'The first is that they couldn't because they don't sound different. The second is that they don't have to. They have a large enough market to keep them in profits without ever showing anyone that their products are any different than the $1 and $2 products they replaced. When you find evidence that this isn't true, then the witch burnings will end. Until then, anybody got a match?

Rockwell
01-23-2004, 11:49 AM
I didn't miss your point - it's been repeated here ad nauseum. "If I can't here it then nobody can" .

I am sure you can link to an example of this.

E-Stat
01-23-2004, 01:29 PM
Can you explain why after about 30 years since these products first appeared on the market, not one manufacturer of the countless dozens or even hundreds of different companies and thousands of different models has ever once demonstrated through a fair double blind test that their products are in any way different in their audible performance let alone proven that they are better?

The same observation can be made for virtually any component in the audio chain. Has anyone performed DBT testing to ascertain whether or not there are any audible differences between the Bose Acoustimass speakers and Quad ESLs? Has anyone performed DBT testing to ascertain whether or not there are any audible differences between a Dual 1215 and a VPI TNT-HRX?

You either hear the differences or you don't.

rw

Bill L
01-23-2004, 03:41 PM
I'll go with your second reason. They don't have to. The cables stand or fall on their own. As do other products whose evaluation relies on sensory perception like colognes, food, art, and fabric softener. To some there is no appreciation for the subtle differences. To others it's a world of difference. Audio is no different. This talk of rampant placebo and obligatory proof is obsessive and, frankly, pompous. Why should the cable companies listen to you?

mtrycraft
01-23-2004, 05:08 PM
What I was referring to is the fact that speaker sound can be biased by other senses entering the picture, not that 'everyone' will pick the same speaker sound.
What Toole has demonstared that people will pick different speakers when they are not biased by their sight sending useless information as brand name, style, etc.

skeptic
01-23-2004, 05:40 PM
Why should the cable companies listen to you?

They shouldn't. They are making money hand over fist. If they aren't afraid of the FTC, why should they care what I have to say. But if the FTC ever got around to doing what they should be doing, they would have to listen. They would have to cut the crap. They'd have to put up or shut up.

Chuck
01-23-2004, 06:12 PM
What I was referring to is the fact that speaker sound can be biased by other senses entering the picture, not that 'everyone' will pick the same speaker sound.
What Toole has demonstared that people will pick different speakers when they are not biased by their sight sending useless information as brand name, style, etc.

OK, that makes sense. Expectations can color any experience, so I guess I didn't see proof of that as coming from Toole.

Did you get my e-mail yet? I don't care to revisit the portion of the thread where the trouble is afoot, so I don't even know if you've responded to the forum posts where I asked you for a response. Have ya?

Some of this stuff makes me think that the forum may not have changed as much as I'd hoped. Different party line but same foolishness, if ya know what I mean? I finally heard from Chris on the matter(s) but he's not even going to be able to look at the posts until Monday. I'll probably keep a lower profile until the mess is sorted out. It all reminds me of Pythagoras and those pesky irrational numbers. :)

See ya,

Chuck

Chuck
01-23-2004, 06:28 PM
I think what he is saying is that some things are worth listening to and some aren't. For the things that aren't, like wires that are unlikely to change the sound, the buyer may want to use more rigorous testing or avoid auditioning them all together. Of course, it is up to the buyer to decide what is worth listening to, but I think that most people assume or are told that wires will make their system better. I would take the advice of an engineer over some salesman or wire evangelist on what is likely to improve sound.

What cemented my own conclusons about the flawed nature of wire sonics are the reviews and comparisons of digital cables, cables which cannot impart any signature, but people can still imagine them.

Whoops! MAJOR WHOOPS! I think I responded to this post last night, thinking that you were talking about someone else (not Mtrycraft). My mistake. Guess I'm still adjusting to the new forum format. I'm not going to revisit that part of this thread because the behavior there is objectionable, so I'm just going to post this correction in response to outer post (here). Sorry for the confusion.

Skeptic is the one calling people names and misrepresenting things because he's hung-up on the shill think. The real reason he attacked Bo is because Bo struck a nerve. Before the forum was remodeled Skeptic sometimes claimed that he was an EE in his efforts to intimidate others. Mtrycraft and Jneutron can both verify this fact (the archives have apparently been deleted). He saw Bo's post as an attack because he's guilty of doing what Bo was asking about. When I made the mistake of pointing out that it was illogical to assume that Bo was a shill he attacked me for the same reason. He is probably ashamed of what he's done in the past and is likely afraid that everyone will find out. Unfortunately he doesn't realize that senseless attacks based on thin-air only discredit the attacker. Anyway, sorry I made an error and thought you were talking about Skeptic.

Mtry, sorry buddy, didn't mean that you'd been acting like Skeptic. Sometimes he's as reasonable as you, but at others he's something else. I've added him to my ignore list, and don't intend to even visit the portion of the thread where he's behaving so foolishly. Hopefully you've responded to my posts there. (Thanks.)

My bad guys. I'll try to be more careful in the future (but Murphy is always out to get me, so please don’t expect perfection).

See ya,

Chuck

mtrycraft
01-23-2004, 09:07 PM
You overlook some of the most important factors. "Big mistake." :)

People have to have some basis for any decision. Are you actually advising the purchase of audio equipment without listening to it first. If so all I can say is that it is the most idiotic idea every proposed on this or any other audio forum.

Exactly WHAT do you expect people to do, Mtry? Is everyone supposed to get an EE degree before they purchase audio equipment? Your position is totally unsupportable, in spite of the fallibility of our senses. We all, including you, have to make decisions based on the best information we have available. When it comes to audio, all most people have is their ears. I didn't realize that you were the extremist who thinks a pig in a poke is better than using the best information we have available. I'm shocked!

Me thinks perhaps your words here don't actually reflect your thinking. If they do, then you might want to consider trying to find another hobby. :)

What makes you think your advice is going to lead to greater end-user satisfaction than anyone else's advice? The whole idea of buying audio gear based on the advice of someone else is totally misguided. Hell man, if we do that, we'll all be buying exotic cables, becuae the reviewers love them so much. Big mistake! :)

Let's examine what was posted, what I responded to with what.

This is whatwas posted:

The only thing I would say is trust your ears over any advice given on this board, or any other for that matter!

He wants you to disregard everything and trust your ears completely.

You agree with this completely?

I made a comment based on knowledge gained over many years, how gullible one can be, biased, etc to fully trust what one hears and not rely on other inputs and others knowledge on the subject.

Big mistake based on what we know about human gullibility and how easy it is to confuse senses.

Is this not accurate? Senses cannot be fooled? We are not gullible?

I said nothing about not listening, you disagree?

I didn't get into what else one should know or do to make better choices, decisions.
One should know a bit more than just to listen and go off blindly on that perception.

skeptic
01-24-2004, 06:14 AM
I rarely if ever mention that I am an engineer and then almost only when someone directly challenges my qualifications to say what I have said. Of course on an internet message board like this, all you really need to qualifiy is a moniker and registering to log on. I stick by what I have said. And I stick by my contention that arguements should stand or fall on their own merit and not on the credentials of those who made them. Plenty of engineers and scientists have not only said things that made no sense but turned out to be shills acting in their own self financial interest. In this case, it stick with my original conclusion that ob130 was a shill and so far I have not seen a second posting from him denying it.

Did it hit a nerve when I read his comment? Not really. I'm accustomed to being attacked for not being part of the audiophile "in crowd." Not only do I see the whole cable industry as a scam but I much prefer cds to vinyl (I still own a large collection of vinyl and a few turntables) and tubes to transisitors (I still have a few old tube amplifiers floating around my basement.) I prefer the bass of acoustic suspension speakers to ported speakers, put them right next to a wall and use an equalizer and oh yes, tone controls. In other words, I'm living in the past. And on those rare occasions when I hear current "audiophile" equipment, I don't regret it. That's because when a pair of 8" two way speakers costs several thousand dollars and amplifiers costing thousands don't even raise an eyebrow any more, I am reminded that contrary to the long term trend in every other area of electronics, in high end audio, the consumer pays more and more to get less and less. And in the area of cables, it has reached its extreme. A pile of money for an illusion. People who own this over-rated junk don't like to hear that, but most of all, people who sell it hate it the most. Especially when it comes from someone who might know what he's talking about. That's how I knew immediately bo130 was a shill. I know what I'm talking about there too because I've seen his ilk so many times.

mtrycraft
01-24-2004, 05:42 PM
.Did you get my e-mail yet? See ya,Chuck

Yes and sent you one back but now I am not sure which post you were referring originally. I also answerd that one too on the board, I think :)

JoeW2
01-24-2004, 07:08 PM
To me, the real red flag is raised by those who demand skepticism for everything but thier own opinions. The very second that someone says, or implies, your disagreement with them is evidence of your idiocy, rest assured that you are dealing with an idiot.
mtrycrafts is the posterboy of this approach. People who disagree are automaticaly presumed to be victims of advertising. Not skeptical enough, he will tell you.
But, when people express skepticism about his views, he lumps them in with Miss Cleo subscribers, alien abduction fanatics, and bigfoot enthusiasts. This is, quite simply, the mark of a moron. I don't mean this as a personal dig, it's a critique of the rhetoric.
Trust your senses and your sensibilities. You may be right, you may be wrong. For that matter, mtrycrafts may be right or may be wrong. Quite frankly, it doesn't much matter. This is an opinion forum. Take it for what it's worth.

skeptic
01-25-2004, 04:03 AM
"...This is, quite simply, the mark of a moron. I don't mean this as a personal dig..."

Beckman
01-25-2004, 03:54 PM
WOW, take it easy. Some of you people are CRAZY. Talking about beating wives, calling people liars, personal attacks.

I do not have college degree. I am graduating this May with an Engineering Physics Degree (10 more credits:)). Engineering Physics is a combination of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Physics. Basicly someone to bridge the gap between Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. However, I have taken mostly EE classes and will graduate 20 credits away from an EE degree.

In Platos "Appology", Socrates says (in so many words) he is smart because he knows that he doesn't know everything. I do think that there are EE's that frequent this site that think their degree and their experiance makes them know everything. There are those too that swear they can hear distinct differences and get quite angry when people tell them otherwise.

Socrates was given the death penalty for his questionong of authority. Mtry is ridiculed in the same way for his questioning of people's opinions.

When someones opinion is questioned they tend to take it as a personal attack and there ego is hurt.

I wonder if anyone that frequents this site has a big ego?

mtrycraft
01-25-2004, 10:17 PM
I do not have college degree. I am graduating this May with an Engineering Physics Degree (10 more credits:)). Engineering Physics is a combination of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Physics. Basicly someone to bridge the gap between Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. However, I have taken mostly EE classes and will graduate 20 credits away from an EE degree.


That's great. Why not also do that 20 credits for a double degree? Talk the school and parents into it :)

skeptic
01-26-2004, 04:44 AM
"I do think that there are EE's that frequent this site that think their degree and their experiance makes them know everything. There are those too that swear they can hear distinct differences and get quite angry when people tell them otherwise."

I think you'll find that far from thinking they know everything, most electrical engineers are well aware of their limitiations. At least it's my experience that the good ones are (physicists are another story.) What seems like a complete mystery and totally escaped you becomes crystal clear and everybody becomes an expert ---- after they throw the switch and the smoke clears. Thank god that never happened to me but every electrical engineer knows someone it did happen to and knows that it was only a matter of luck if it hasn't happened to him.

Engineers are always ready and willing to learn more. But there is a difference between being taught and being scammed. Degreed engineers have sat in enough classrooms, taken enough courses, heard enough lectures to know the difference between receiving real knowledge and receiving a snow job. And if they don't know it right out of school, they learn it from real world of experience from the endless parade of salesmen who knock on their door and try to sell them something over a liquid lunch. One occupational hazard of being an engineer....getting fat and drinking too much from all of the free food and booze that come your way as part of the job.

Beckman
01-26-2004, 07:52 AM
I do not have college degree. I am graduating this May with an Engineering Physics Degree (10 more credits:)). Engineering Physics is a combination of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Physics. Basicly someone to bridge the gap between Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. However, I have taken mostly EE classes and will graduate 20 credits away from an EE degree.


That's great. Why not also do that 20 credits for a double degree? Talk the school and parents into it :)

I would, but the parents arn't paying for it:(

sofsoldier
01-26-2004, 11:04 AM
I am an electrical engineer, hear me roar!

Just kidding.

Chris
01-27-2004, 07:56 AM
Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... and the qualifications of those who debate the issue... can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere? This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality. If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site.

Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere. We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference.

Rockwell
01-27-2004, 08:27 AM
Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... and the qualifications of those who debate the issue... can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere? This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality. If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site.

Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere. We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference.
Chris, who are you replying to? The threaded view show your post as a response to Beckmans rather benign post.

skeptic
01-27-2004, 09:47 AM
"Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... "

No but is is a major issue. This is not a board where everybody is easily sold a bill of goods because there was good advertising copy and someone believed it and brought it here. There are enough regulars who ask for more evidence than just someones testimonial. This is a very controversial area and those on one side of the arguement want the right to make their points just as much as those on the other.


"and the qualifications of those who debate the issue..."

The thread about a fake EE degree was a very nasty posting which I assumed was aimed directly at me. I tried to answer it as straightforwardly and courteously as possible. Usually we let arguements here stand or fall on their own merits. Among regulars, opinions are not likely to change. But among newcomers, a range of opinions is the only way someone can keep an open mind. And they should know that the opinions coming from the skeptical side are not just from people who are too cheap to buy this class of product but from people who have good reason to come to an informed opinion.

"can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere?"

This is the place where arguing is supposed to happen. But it is not a place for personal attacks. Usually when one person resorts to personal attacks, it is because he has run out of real arguements. If you can't kill the message, shoot the messenger.

"This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality."

If by that you mean that this forum is only for those who believe cables make an audible difference and will not challenge that view and that those who do challenge it or at least demand more than testimonial evidence are unwelcome, then this forum is no better than cable asylum and if that is the case, I'm outta here. I said before that I would not post to a site which will censor one opinion or another.

"If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site."

NOBODY is discounted. But their opinions should be open to challenge and discussion, not merely be accepted as a way to preserve harmony. That's how tyrants keep law and order in dictatorships. Set out the partly line and shoot anyone who disagrees openly with it.

"Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere."

Agreed.

"We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference"

People who challenge the value of audio cables are not all trolls. And they don't tell people that they are dumb when they challenge their ideas or beliefs. Blanket Characterization of people who challenge an idea by classifying them as insulting trolls is totally unfair and out of order for someone in the role of site administrator.

Bill L
01-27-2004, 01:25 PM
Chuck, this is the forum people go to when they want controversy. Take away the passion and the entertainment goes with it. I'm not sure why you picked my post to express yourself in the way you did. You seem persecuted. Good luck on your mission.

mtrycraft
01-27-2004, 08:54 PM
I would, but the parents arn't paying for it:(

A student loan? If you don't do it now, it will be that much more difficult later when you have obligations. And, you will have forgotten things :)

Chuck
01-28-2004, 12:46 AM
Chuck, this is the forum people go to when they want controversy. Take away the passion and the entertainment goes with it. I'm not sure why you picked my post to express yourself in the way you did. You seem persecuted. Good luck on your mission.

Mission? We don't need no stinkin' missions. :)

Chris wants this to be a forum where people can discuss wire and cables without the kind of behavior that is currently so prevalent. I'd like to see him succeed, so if I have to have a mission here I guess it would be to see Chris have the kind of forum he wants.

Be careful about guys who come across as persecuted. They may just be holding back their darker side. The Hulk says it best. "Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." :)
I guess if someone is going to get the wrong impression I'd prefer being seen as feeling persecuted to being seen as overly aggressive.

What's your take on the post Chris left this morning? (see http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?p=11941#post11941)

Chuck
01-28-2004, 01:27 AM
People who challenge the value of audio cables are not all trolls.

No, but according to you, anyone who posts positive comments about cables is a shill, and anyone who points out that your conclusion is unsupportable, you mock and belittle. It's pretty clear that you are one of the troublemakers Chris is addressing here, and it has nothing to do with your beliefs about cables or about your technical acumen. Just look at your posting history and you'll understand. You have a terrible record, probably the worst of anyone who has ever posted here. Chris is tired of the garbage, and even Mtrycraft has tired of it.


And they don't tell people that they are dumb when they challenge their ideas or beliefs.[/QUOTE}

You have done so in this very thread, and now you are trying to deny it. That's as bad as someone claiming that they have an EE degree when they don’t. You discount others and then deny having done it, in the very topic where you committed the act. You must think most people are too dim to notice. Skeptic, you're wrong. People do notice. Most people, not just a few. That's why Chris wants it stopped. People don't like it.

[QUOTE] Blanket Characterization of people who challenge an idea by classifying them as insulting trolls is totally unfair and out of order for someone in the role of site administrator.

Chris tried to be nice and not mention anyone’s name, but most anyone can read this topic and figure it out. It's easy to see who was calling people names, "shill" for example, and who was doing all they could to argue with anyone they could. Chris commented, at least in part, due to my complaints about your posts. That's a pity too, because you have the kind of training and background to be a valuable contributor here, and you and I actually agree on most things. However, it is your senseless attacks that called attention to this thread, so don't pretend that you don't know what Chris is talking about. You aren't dim so, don't pretend that you don't understand.

Understand this. Telling someone they can't call people names the way you have been doing ("shill" is the most obvious example) is NOT censorship. You'd like to make it seem that way to hide the real reason Chris had to get involved, but your tactic isn't working. Chris saw fit to comment because you and a few others were behaving like barbarians. If you can't see that you were out of line, and take steps to prevent such behavior in the future, then I'm sure the forum won't miss the behavior when you're gone. Chris says it won't be tolerated, and I support his position 100%. You can talk about anything. but you can't do what you've been doing. I got the message long ago. How'd you manage to miss it?

skeptic
01-28-2004, 04:49 AM
Your sanctimonious dribble is not worthy of a serious reply.
Get a life!

Bill L
01-28-2004, 08:09 AM
If he succeeds then we may have an Audio Asylum clone here. How ironic since AA was conceived as an asylum from the behavior at this specific site. The root of the problem here is that no discussion of cable sonics can occur w/o interjection from the opposing camp. Each side thinks the other is giving bad advice and it then escalates. My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information. The 'bickering' here is a combination of trolls, egos and attitudes. It's fun if you enjoy pushing peoples buttons and many make use of it in that capacity. Visitors who don't see this are cannon fodder. I wish him (Chris) luck. My blunt $.02

pctower
01-28-2004, 09:29 AM
If he succeeds then we may have an Audio Asylum clone here. How ironic since AA was conceived as an asylum from the behavior at this specific site. The root of the problem here is that no discussion of cable sonics can occur w/o interjection from the opposing camp. Each side thinks the other is giving bad advice and it then escalates. My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information. The 'bickering' here is a combination of trolls, egos and attitudes. It's fun if you enjoy pushing peoples buttons and many make use of it in that capacity. Visitors who don't see this are cannon fodder. I wish him (Chris) luck. My blunt $.02

There certainly is a problem here from my perspective in that subjectivists can't carry on threads where they share their non-scientific discussions without the mind-numbing challenges from mtrycrafts and others.

On the other hand, I don't think the role this board plays in challenging unsupported technical claims and the advertising hype from cable companies should be eliminated or curtailed through censorship. It serves, in my opinion, a very important purpose.

It's just too bad that certain people here won't practice a little courtesy and not butt into conversations where people don't want to talk about cables from an objective, scientific perspective. A little bit of judgment and perspective is required to differentiate between conversations between subjectivists where they are simply sharing their experiences with one another with no interest in getting into technical issues and those where unsupported, absolutist technical claims are being made that should be challenged.

As it is, very few subjectivists come to this board because of the constant hounding they receive, so it becomes a fairly one-dimensional discussion.

And, it seems to me that most of the regulars accept without any critical comment the results of old DBTs that could in no way qualify for publication in a true scientific journal, while castigating subjectivists for relying on their sighted tests. Both are anecdotal, but the regulars here refuse to discuss stuff like this. They will simply label anyone who questions any piece of “evidence” which they dogmatically accept as gospel as a troublemaker and a believer in alien abductions (one of their favorite slams), even through questioning and critical review is at the heart of the scientific method. Their tactics often resemble those applied on the other side by John Curl, Jon and other yeasayers.

Despite my personal battle with Skeptic and disagreements with some of his speculations on peripheral issues, he seems to be one of the most objective and knowledgeable people on this board when it comes to discussing technical and scientific issues.

Because most of the regulars here share similar views, it takes fine distinctions or personality conflicts (such as the current battle between Chuck and Skeptic) to generate any excitement. Occasionally someone like Jon will come along and stir things up, but unfortunately he prefers to talk about yeasayers and naysayers rather than actual technical issues. I tried siring things up for a while, but I don’t have a technical background and so my threads usually devolved quickly into mindless discussions about whether I was merely quacky or seriously demented.

Chuck
01-28-2004, 11:35 AM
Skeptic, just so you know, you've been on my ignore list since you started your irrational outbursts in this topic/thread. That was the same point at which I contacted Chris. He's already warned you once that your behavior and irrational personal attacks will not be tolerated, but if you want to pretend or imagine that it's all drivel that's your prerogative. Chris has made it clear that he has no intent of letting it continue. I have no intention of reading inflammatory posts from people who only want to stir up trouble and then deny their activities when it's pointed out, so I block posts from the few who lack the social skills to carry on a civil conversation with others. The only reason I read your rebuttal to Chris is because his post was the result of my complaints about your posts, and I wanted to see what kind of excuses you'd come up with. I actually expected something a little more creative than a denial of the activities we've all observed, but I did expect you to continue with the personal attacks when you read my response. As a result, I haven't seen your response, and don't actually know whether or not you are continuing with the same bad behavior that you’ve been warned about. However, Chris says that your continued bashing of others will not be tolerated. If you think that's just drivel he'll probably have to prove you wrong. Do you really want to push until you force him to restrict your activities here? If so, be my guest, but while you finish up slamming Chris and his forum because he won't let you slam others the way you've been doing, don't expect me to be reading
/b your
drivel.

May I humbly suggest that you might be happier if you follow my lead, and also put my name on your blocked poster list. You obviously have no interest in what Chris wants to do with his forum, nor in my interests in helping him achieve his goals, so we have nothing to discuss.

Chuck
01-28-2004, 12:18 PM
My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information.

Chris is trying to change that, and we can only hope that he will be more successful than they've been at AA. AA is hardly a peaceful place for newcomers; Chris wants to actually do what AA claims they've been trying to do, that being to create a place where people can discuss their *subjective experiences* with wire and interconnects, without fear of being attacked, called shills or worse, and so on. This doesn't have to preclude discussions of possible causes of audible differences, including listeners biases and/or misconceptions, but it does mean that the conversations will have to take place without the name-calling and personal attacks. That's going to leave some of the regulars here out in the cold, and will probably kill off a lot of the traffic here, but it should make this a better place for newcomers looking for information. Might not make the information any better, but the atmosphere will almost certainly improve.

IMHO, those who come here only to argue rather than learn and/or share, would do better to take care of their personal problems using private messaging or e-mail. Chris apparently intends to see that they stop the activity on the general forums. Like you, I wish Chris luck. He's got a very hard row to hoe.

See ya,

Chuck

Chuck
01-28-2004, 12:30 PM
(such as the current battle between Chuck and Skeptic)

There is no "current battle between Chuck and Skeptic.” He's developed a habit of calling subjectivists shills and worse, and has tried to paint me in a negative light because I pointed out his behavior. The battle is actually between Chris (our moderator) and Skeptic, as I long ago blocked Skeptic and complained to Chris. I don't engage in battles on this forum, because it is not consistent with what our moderator has requested.

Naturally, those who are guilty of habitually engaging in the sport of creating discontent and argument will see any attempt to curtail the foolishness as a battle, but it's really not. It's just Chris trying to make this a better place for all of us, and a few who are supporting his efforts. To see it as anything else is to spin the reality of the situation.

pctower
01-28-2004, 12:50 PM
There is no "current battle between Chuck and Skeptic.” He's developed a habit of calling subjectivists shills and worse, and has tried to paint me in a negative light because I pointed out his behavior. The battle is actually between Chris (our moderator) and Skeptic, as I long ago blocked Skeptic and complained to Chris. I don't engage in battles on this forum, because it is not consistent with what our moderator has requested.

Naturally, those who are guilty of habitually engaging in the sport of creating discontent and argument will see any attempt to curtail the foolishness as a battle, but it's really not. It's just Chris trying to make this a better place for all of us, and a few who are supporting his efforts. To see it as anything else is to spin the reality of the situation.

I should clarify. I used the word "battle" rather loosely in referring to the recent exchange between you and Skeptic. I didn't mean to use the term in a perjoritive manner toward you or Skeptic. That would be a colosal case of the pot calling the kettle black, given my track record. It was just an illustration of the kind of thing that does seem to generate excitement, for better or worse.

Chuck
01-28-2004, 02:36 PM
I should clarify. I used the word "battle" rather loosely in referring to the recent exchange between you and Skeptic. I didn't mean to use the term in a perjoritive manner toward you or Skeptic. That would be a colosal case of the pot calling the kettle black, given my track record. It was just an illustration of the kind of thing that does seem to generate excitement, for better or worse.

Hi Phil,

This e-mail notification really keeps me on my toes. I only just left my last post a few minutes ago, and now "you've got mail" and there is a notification that someone has responded to one of the AR threads. That's pretty cool, as long as it doesn't become too much of an imposition. I really like the new forum format.

You're clarification is both noted and appreciated. Both AR Cable and AA Cable thrive on the excitement created by the heated personal exchanges, but that's not what Chris wants to see on this forum. I've already told Chris that I think he will most certainly see a reduction in traffic, but it's his forum, and his call.

The last time you and I had an exchange, we had a misunderstanding, and the wheels fell off. I don't care to see that happen again, so I'm a little reluctant to read your posts, and more reluctant to respond, but there is something in all this that I believe you and I agree on, and I want to discuss it with you. If I have managed to misunderstand your statements or position you must realize that I am only human and make mistakes just like everyone else. Don't make too much of simple misunderstandings (not that we will have any misunderstandings this time, but they were totally unexpected last time, so I'm just trying to head off trouble before it starts).
I'll try to qualify my statements extensively to minimize the possibility of any misunderstanding.

I have no intention of putting words in your mouth, but it is my impression from things you have said in the past that you think AA Cable has some problems. AA Cable is represented as a place where people can discuss their subjective experiences in peace, but because they also allow technical posts on their cable forum, there are often heated arguments that quickly turn into name-calling and worse. Unless I'm mistaken, always a possibility, you yourself have stated on several occasions that you felt that people posting their objective ideas on AA Cable were doing something contrary to the intent of the forum. Now perhaps you haven't actually said anything along those lines, but that's my understanding and interpretation based on what I've seen, so don't get upset and accuse me of putting words in your mouth. That is not the intent. I'm merely telling you and others what I have come to believe based on reading your posts. I could be mistaken, and you can correct me without calling me names or comparing me to obnoxious people. That is totally uncalled for and unjustifiable.

The reason I'm re-stating what I believe to be your stated position is to make sure that I have understood properly, and to say that if I have understood your posts correctly then I am in total agreement with you. If I'm mistaken about any of this please try to tell me so without calling me names or comparing me to people you obviously don't like. That is the kind of stuff Chris wants to do away with, and we can all probably do a little better, so be nice.

It is a simple fact of life that we often react negatively when our beliefs are challenged. When one warns others not to discuss religion or politics the warning stems from the fact that such discussions so often lead to heated arguments that rapidly deteriorate and become personal. If we set up a totally open forum to discuss politics or religion we will have endless arguments that degrade into personal attacks, and the excitement might produce a lot of traffic, but it would primarily be of interest only to those who wanted to argue with others. If, on the other hand, we restrict the participation in our political or religious forum to those who share common beliefs, the participants will be quite different. We will have an exchange of information between people who are in substantial agreement on the basic issues, and as a result there will be more information exchanged, and less "excitement."

The question that begs to be answered is this; Do Republicans, Democrats, Christians, agnostics, atheists, and others, have a right to get together on Web forums and discuss their common beliefs? Further, do they have the right to do so without constant or even infrequent disruptions from those who disagree with them? If Chris wants to have a forum for Democrats, or agnostics, and wants them to be able to have their discussions without constant personal attacks like we see here, then he has to restrict the contributors in some way. That is not rightly called censorship. A Republican cannot go to a Democratic convention and express his views as if he were a proper member of the community. Chris wants to define this community in a particular way, and that is his decision to make. He is trying to make this forum more like what AA Cable claims to be trying to be, and unless I'm mistaken you also think that there should be a place where people can discuss cable sonics without being hassled, called shills, and attacked in other subtle and not-so-subtle ways.

I think (and feel free to correct me, nicely, if I'm wrong) that we (you and I) agree that there needs to be a place for people to discuss cable sonics without being hassled. We have AH and ecoustics for subjective viewpoints, and AA (like Saturday night) is alright for fighting, so as it is everyone EXCEPT the subjectivists has a place where they can post in peace and be with those of like mind, even if the like mind is the mind of argument (as is the case on AA Cable, and for the time being also here at AR Cable). I think Chris is trying to create a resource that is missing from the Web, and whether we agree with him or not, he's certainly got the right to do what he wants with his forum.

Calling it censorship is just plain wrong. It is not censorship to ask the atheist to refrain from disrupting Church services. That would be a matter of maintaining the peace. Sometimes we have to hold our tongue until the appropriate time and place, right?

Anyone who thinks Chris is acting as a censor is simply looking at the situation from a skewed perspective (and perhaps all perspectives are skewed). Those who think it is censorship need to rethink. Try to take their ideas about audio and convince the AES that their freedom of speech gives them the right to present their ideas at the annual AES convention. Unless the ideas are something very special the AES isn't interested in hearing from the man on the street. No private organization has to accept membership or input from anyone. The word "private" precludes this. It is true that we cannot discriminate based on certain factors in our business dealings, but a private club or organization, Church, etc., is an entirely different matter. A Web forum is in fact a privately owned and operated organization. The participants are the principles of the organization, and the organization, being privately owned, can reject or accept content and contributions from whomever it chooses. The forum owner is the only one with any rights regarding these matters. Chris has a privately owned Web site and has total control over the content thereof. It is exactly as if this were a print publication. Does anyone think they can write an objective argument against cable sonics and then accuse Stereophile and TAS of being "censored" if they refuse to publish the article? Does anyone think they can write an article about evolution and then accuse the Christian Science Monitor of censorship when they refuse to publish it? Does anyone really believe that they can call others names on a forum where the moderator and forum owner don’t want such behavior, and then accuse the forum moderator and owner of censorship? Enforcing rules is not censorship. Most technical discussions require controls; People can’t just spew out anything they like, at will, without respect for the task at hand. Rules enforcement is simply not censorship. Thinking that it is reveals a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word "censorship." Don't you agree? If not, where is my thinking flawed?

Thanks,

Chuck

Rockwell
01-28-2004, 02:39 PM
Chris is trying to change that, and we can only hope that he will be more successful than they've been at AA. AA is hardly a peaceful place for newcomers; Chris wants to actually do what AA claims they've been trying to do, that being to create a place where people can discuss their *subjective experiences* with wire and interconnects, without fear of being attacked, called shills or worse, and so on. ...

The original poster of this topic did not come here to dicuss anything subjective about wires. The comment was a personal attack on one or more members, questioning their integrity. He may not be a shill, but is certainly a troll.

Chuck
01-28-2004, 03:16 PM
The original poster of this topic did not come here to dicuss anything subjective about wires. The comment was a personal attack on one or more members, questioning their integrity. He may not be a shill, but is certainly a troll.

Hi Rockwell,

I don't doubt that the post was a troll. That isn't what created the problems that made Chris feel that he needed to get involved. The problems started when it was pointed out that calling Bo a shill was unsupportable (he may or man not be a shill). For that I have been attacked by one person repeatedly, and Chris doesn't want that kind of behavior on his forum. He doesn't want people being called shills without some justification and he doesn't want people attacked and called names without justification either. In this instance, the bashing was started by one person, and will probably continue until Chris puts an end to it, and I for one applaud his efforts.

See ya,

Chuck

bo130
12-31-2006, 10:44 PM
I find it strange that on your second post on this site you are already challenging people who have posted here far longer and made far more contributions to other peoples' real knowledge than you probably ever will..
Yes, but then you make the assumption that, only on my second post, that I am some no-nothing newbie who wouldn't know the difference between a speaker an a tin-can.

My post was not about me. I was simply commenting on the people who have posted within this forum as supposed "authorities" because of their claims that they possess degrees that they do not have. Maybe perhaps you can drag the personal attacks out of what was a genuine question. However, your lengthy reply and the content within makes me come to the conclusion that my posting hit far too close to home for you to deal with. But thanks for the reply nonetheless.

SlumpBuster
12-31-2006, 10:51 PM
Dude, isn't your come back like three years too late?

Dusty Chalk
01-01-2007, 11:21 PM
Whoa! Time travel is real!

kexodusc
01-02-2007, 04:39 AM
Glad you recovered from that coma. Let's bring you up to speed - it's 2007 - Bush got re-elected, the Red Sox won a world series, the Dems control the House and Senate, Tom Cruise went totally insane, there's a new Rocky movie, New England is still a really good football team and turns out there weren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Who knew?

Woochifer
01-02-2007, 09:22 AM
Glad you recovered from that coma. Let's bring you up to speed - it's 2007 - Bush got re-elected, the Red Sox won a world series, the Dems control the House and Senate, Tom Cruise went totally insane, there's a new Rocky movie, New England is still a really good football team and turns out there weren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Who knew?

Yup, and Chuck, mtrycrafts, PC Tower, Bill L, Rockwell, and Skeptic long ago picked up their toys and left for other playgrounds.

Happy New Year Everyone! And all the best for 2005 ... errr ... 2007! :D

GMichael
01-02-2007, 09:32 AM
Yes, but then you make the assumption that, only on my second post, that I am some no-nothing newbie who wouldn't know the difference between a speaker an a tin-can.

My post was not about me. I was simply commenting on the people who have posted within this forum as supposed "authorities" because of their claims that they possess degrees that they do not have. Maybe perhaps you can drag the personal attacks out of what was a genuine question. However, your lengthy reply and the content within makes me come to the conclusion that my posting hit far too close to home for you to deal with. But thanks for the reply nonetheless.

Wow, you've been here for 3 years longer than I have. I must have been doing some drinking because I just don't recall you at all.
Well? Aren't you going to welcome me to AR?

emorphien
01-02-2007, 10:55 AM
I'm not an EE, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

GMichael
01-02-2007, 11:32 AM
I'm not an EE, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Good one!

Dusty Chalk
01-02-2007, 02:27 PM
Oh, shogfritt, the tunnel collapsed, we're going to have to wait another three years for his next response. Everyone: remember where you were.

GMichael
01-02-2007, 02:29 PM
Remember to wake me if I doze off.:sleep: