Only the beginning...

[Resident Loser]

...of what will most likely be the end...

I'm not from a musical family, the only things my parents could play were the radio and the "Victrola"...I have been exposed to music, however, for as long as I can remember.

From 78s to digital dizziness, I've purty much heard it all...played on everything from that old portable Victrola to some of today's SOTA gear...got involved in the early 60s with classical music played on Garrard and Criterion(LRE) equipment...learned to work the guitar, started a band and made some bucks at a semi-pro level...still play for my own amusement...got into live recording work and did that for a bit, so I'm fairly aware of what live music sounds like and how the recording process affects what you ultimately hear. I'm one of those who tends to investigate and immerse myself in all aspects my interests.

Over the years, I have found that the graphic equalizer can be a most invaluable tool on many levels. It reveals a myriad of things for anyone who really cares to listen to it and can poke holes in many beliefs. I've tinkered and tweaked, but for the most part I have listened to the music, not the gear. Regulars know I can enjoy a good performance on anything from my old GE portable with the 3in. speaker to my reference system which(in the same spirit as Mtry) is superflous to and consequently has no bearing whatsoever on anything I may present here.

Quite some time ago, I happened on this site trying to find out what had happened to "Audio" magazine, the offspring of "Audio Engineering" itself a successor to "Radio".

I recalled when I discontinued my "quest for the grail" and it's constant "upgrade-itis", wires were becoming the "next big thing"...handed me a laff then, as it still does this very minute. So the first forum I visited was...you guessed it..."Cables" .Lurked a bit, signed up and let fly...I was descended upon like vultures on a carcass, maggots on a meat-pie...oh, the fun we had...met like-minded individuals and in solitary concert more than held our own against the myth-makers and purveyors of psuedo-science led by none other than (insert name here)...

While I can read schematics fluently and am comfortably experienced with test gear and soldering irons, I realized I could never compete on a technical level; while a related field, my "real" job is not audio design or fabrication. My approach has been one of reason and simple common sense, based on my experience and investigation into the real facts that seem to would seem to support(but in fact moreoften, undermine) the "factoids" presented...My mission has been to present that gleaned information in an entertaining and oftimes sarcastic manner...I give what I've gotten, no more no less...

But enough history...relegating the mention of ABX, DBT and the like to it's own "special" place, is certainly not in keeping with the history of this site...and for the record, blathering on about specs is bushleague...something newbies do when they learn the jargon and think they know it all, trying to impress the easily impressed.

DBTs et al, are rarely, if ever, the subject of posts, yet have become the sore point with some members.

Most begin with a simple question which may result in simple answers from all...say like "Is it a good idea to take my amp into the tub?" Others seem just as simple on the face of things, but become more complex as answers based on manufacturer preference, individual experience and other subjective elements are added to the mix...none of which really apply, because what works for you, in your environment, with your "source material"(a holdover from MY newbie days) and at your volume levels, means one blessed thing to the posters situation. It is all anecdotal...subjective...and subject to biases.

And that's where the trouble begins...

jimHJJ(...to be continued as time permits...and if I'm allowed to...just noticed another PM...oh, goody...)

[Resident Loser]

...already in progress...lessee, where am I...oh yeah...anywho...

...that's where the trouble begins...

Since the answer(s) provided are subjective in nature, the only real alternative is to take those answers and submit them to scrutiny, in the light of day...WHERE THEY HAPPEN...I'm not gonna' take it back to the shop or some other remote location, it makes no sense...so questions are gonna' be asked, some folks are gonna' be uncomfortable...sorry, that's what happens...the subjectivity is called into question and invariably it will be pointed out that "there has been absolutely no definitive proof, blah, blah, blah and etc." We all know the drill.

If it is confusing to the initial poster, well I'm sorry folks...the first time someone held up two fingers and asked "How many fingers am I holding up?" it was JUST as confusing, JUST as intimidating and JUST as frustrating as anything could be. However, if you wanted to learn you took your lumps and learned from the experience. Heck, the first time I went into a model RR shop and asked for a caboose kit, I was greeted with the response: Steam-era or diesel, bobber or two truck, wood sheathed or truss-rod or welded steel? let's not even mention scale!...sheesh, it's Christmas, I wanted a caboose not the Spanish Inquisiton...don't even ask about my first guitar, or camera, or car...anyway, I digress(as I am prone to do)...It caused me to learn, to read, to see beyond...

Removing the alternative POV in some misguided altruistic attempt at making this place "easy" accomplishes nothing. You will get a group of folks who think wires are tone controls, that tone controls are taboo and that throwing vast sums of money at a "problem" is the answer to everything. How many people are gonna' take a walk down the block to the Science lab, talk about intimidating...unless the alternatives are allowed to be presented in situ, the whole thing is a farce.

One falsehood constantly presented is that "according to objectivists, everything sounds the same" or some variant on the theme...well no, that ain't it. Things can and do sound different, but is that difference improvement or simply difference...again very subjective and calls for some sort of conclusion...that conclusion is problematic, because of those biases I mentioned earlier...There in the progression of things, that's where the objectivity of ABXing and DBTs come into play...ifn ya' wants to be fat, dumb and happy, ya' plunks down yer bucks and yore on yore merry way to the Wonnerful World of Wires or whatever...if however, you are exposed and open to the possibility that outside influences can(and do) play a great part in your perception, you're on that learning path...you can then make a determination based on a panoply of ideas...

Another misleading statement is "objectivists don't listen or have tin ears or only believe what they read" Well, a great big James Earl Jones booming "NO!" to that one...we do listen, that's where it starts, but it doesn't end there...That empirical evidence is then subjected to some light of day...is it different? is it better? is it my imagination? has the fact that I just spent $$$ played any part in my perception? Why? There are always questions. That's why we all say YES by all means listen, listen to everything...listen to live music, listen to varied sources...just be aware you are fallible and what you ultimately percieve can be affected by many things...like it or not the only way to be absolutely certain that you are not being misled is to apply specific controls...

jimHJJ(...TBC...reality beckons...)

[mtrycraft]

You are doing well on the first two chapters. Keep it up. The suspense is killing me :)

[E-Stat]

Removing the alternative POV in some misguided altruistic attempt at making this place "easy" accomplishes nothing. You will get a group of folks who think wires are tone controls, that tone controls are taboo and that throwing vast sums of money at a "problem" is the answer to everything. How many people are gonna' take a walk down the block to the Science lab, talk about intimidating...unless the alternatives are allowed to be presented in situ, the whole thing is a farce.
I cannot help but chuckle when I read "alternative POV". I cannot speak for Todd nor for the exact trigger for the changes, but my (biased) opinion is that Observationalism was never considered a POV - it was summarily dismissed and directly associated with the belief in aliens, Big Foot and utter ignorance in general.


There in the progression of things, that's where the objectivity of ABXing and DBTs come into play...
Yet there is an utter dearth of any such tests with equipment highly regarded by more than a few folks. Pointing this out only activates the following circular reasoning fallacy:

1. Controlled ABX and DB testing performed with some audio equipment concludes that the audible differences among them are trivial, judged to be "just noticeable" in the best cases.

2. Any questions as to the specifics of what equipment is incorporated in such tests is irrelevant bccause it has been previously ascertained that there were no significant differences among the components tested.

3. Therefore, all audio equipment will perform no better than that which has been tested, either today or in the future. Consequently, there will be no audible differences between that which has been tested and that which has not.

rw

[mtrycraft]

Yet there is an utter dearth of any such tests with equipment highly regarded by more than a few folks.
rw


It is speculation on your part that such equipment is necessary in the first place unless you have some evidence that it matters. So far such has not been the case.

[E-Stat]

It is speculation on your part that such equipment is necessary in the first place unless you have some evidence that it matters. So far such has not been the case.
Mtry, you couldn't have illustrated my point more forcefully. So far there have been no tests performed on high end gear with which to make ANY determination. You assume there will be no difference if testing is ever performed and thus continue to claim that there is none, despite having no data on which to make that assertion. Therein lies a textbook case of circular reasoning. The only valid conclusion is that "we don't really know".

rw

[gonefishin]

:rolleyes: Ahhh...




While reading the above...
...I couldn't help but think of a song that is on one of the CD's my two year old daughter has.


it goes something like this...



*aheem*

*cough...cough*

*aheem*



wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round...

'round and 'round...

'round and 'round...

Wheels on the bus go round and round all thru the town.



This song popped into my mind, because the discussion was headed into the same direction as most every other subjective/objective thread at AR has. Into a circular discussion. I thought to myself...here we go again.

wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round...


of course...the wheels on the bus no longer do go around. Do they?


The bus just kinda sit there :confused:

[Resident Loser]

...for someone who actually gives a $h!t(are cryptic, comic cuss words still OK?)...

Personally I couldn't give a R@t'$ @$$(gee, I hope so) about SBTs, DBTs or TBTs(The last are Treble Blind Tests wherein nobody knows nuthin')...

I have neither the time, the patience nor the facilities to perform such tests...I doubt anyone does...the only ones who might do so are manufacturers eager to share positive results! To me that speaks volumes...

I'm a "plug-and-play" kinda' guy...If I hear something different or unexpected, I'll investigate...beyond that I'm sorta' of the "whatever floats yer boat" school of thought...

The problem arises when someone says "I was on the phone with my father-in-law who lives in Florida, and out of the clear blue sky he asks 'What did you do to your stereo, that it sounds so much better?'" That sort of thing...a world of difference...day and night...even the biggest proponent of the "other side" has stated the diiferences are subtle AND only with SOTA equipment...again, never said there can be no difference, simply said is that difference improvement? Highly subjective.

Observation is only the beginning IMHO. If a newbie asks a question and the usual answers come from the observer-types, there will be questions asked. How do you come by this information? Your(the collective) anecdotal info is no better or worse that mine(again, the collective)...there is no proof or disproof available...we all believe what we want to believe and there are those who believe in UFOs(which I hope exist, beam me outta' here!), Bigfoot etc. Again, no proof one way or the other...it's an analogy as I see it. An indictment? dismissal? In your estimation, maybe, but that is your interpretation, which is also subject to biases, preconcieved notions, shoot-the-messenger syndrome, etc.

I'm open to the fact that you claim to hear things with your system, in your environmment, with your source material...again, has nothing to do with anyone else's situation...the fact that it's possible doesn't really mean a thing, other than to foster a "go listen" approach, I agree...go forth and listen, listen to it live, listen to it canned...just be advised there are "things" that can affect your perception...as Allastair(sp?) Simm's Scrooge said to Marley's ghost "there is more to you of gravy than the grave"...

jimHJJ(...gotta' go, I have letters to write...)

[E-Stat]

Observation is only the beginning IMHO. If a newbie asks a question and the usual answers come from the observer-types, there will be questions asked. How do you come by this information? Your(the collective) anecdotal info is no better or worse that mine(again, the collective)...there is no proof or disproof available...
Agreed on all points. Unlike many "objectivists" here, however, I respond with the details of my experience (and personal listening biases if appropriate) that supports my conclusions. As opposed to throwing out some shopping list of studies, for which the submitter likely has no knowledge of ANY of the details of the study other than the conclusion. Much less has participated in. The oft quoted "Russell" collection is woefully lacking any detail whatsoever. It can prove whatever you want it to when you must make up the supporting details. Here's an example of a response that simply dumbs down the discussion.

I would base my choice on a DBT listeing. No difference, then flexibility. I will leave delusion to the gullible ones.

Here's another that is factually incorrect:

There have been absolutely no new developments in vacuum tube audio in the last 40 years. With the sole exception of slightly better interstage coupling capacitors, the parts are the same, the circuits are the same, and the limitations and problems are the same.

That opinion simply indicates lack of current exposure. Unfortunately, there are likely a few folks who take statements like that at face value.

rw

[Monstrous Mike]

Unlike many "objectivists" here, however, I respond with the details of my experience (and personal listening biases if appropriate) that supports my conclusion.

rw
In case you missed it, I will detail my experiences over the past thirty years in audio.

Cabling

The only time I heard an audible difference in cabling is when I ran very long 18 gauge speaker wire to speakers in my basement. I upgraded to 12 gauge and the sound improved noticably. I have taken several types of expensive cabling home for trials and found no audible differences.

Turntables/Cartridges

This was in my youth but I do believe I did detect better sound with a very expensive cartridge I bought once. Those days are long gone.

CD Players

I have never detected any audible differences in CD players.

Amplifiers

This one is a little tricky since there is an obvious difference between tube and solid state. Also, larger amplifiers (e.g. bigger power supply and caps) will sound better on demanding speakers or at higher volumes. I do not believe most mid-fi SS amps sound different. I haven't tested high end amps.

Speakers

Every speaker system I have owned has sounded different.


And I qualify all of my opinions in that there was no single scientific test I did, simply listening in my own home on various peices of equipment.

Given my experience, if I were to lay a large sum of money out for an ass-kicking system I would dedicate a room in my house and treat it acoustically, purchase some of the very best speakers, place them correctly and then fill in the blanks with the appropriate source and amplification. I might even buy fancy looking cables just for the hell of it.

[Resident Loser]

...Lord knows there is more than enough hype on both sides to go around...

If someone wants to A/B, DBT or XYZ in order to make a choice that's their prerogative ain't it? If they hear no diff, then they are free to go for features or whatever...

In my work, I have been able to observe people and their behaviors at work, at home and in all sorts of situations...if anything I fancy myself as a bit of a student of the human condition...I have, in the past, outlined some of these observations at this site...in many, many cases people are sheep(and I don't disclude myself from being a flock-member in my own way).

Now you certainly seem intelligent enough to realize there are those out there who are, in fact, gullible...who are seen as ripe for the picking by guys looking at their commission numbers...additionally, there are those who have to have the newest, the "best", the most expensive simply for the sake of saying so...I wouldn't hazard a guess as to numbers, but I suspect there are a great many who have more money than brains and are not truly "audiophiles" in anything but name only...expensive cars and "trophy" wives, that sorta' deal.

There are a percentage of those who post here and elsewhere, who MUST include a laundry list of all the gear they own, as if it is supposed to mean something...remember what they said to Charlie the Tuna...

There are those who supply link after link of self-supporting "infotainment", the sheer bulk of which is designed to overwhelm the inexperienced..."this guy must be good, look at all this information he has"...and when you go through it all, it turns out to be opinion, puctuated by factoids, half-truths and supposition. So...they can make electrons do this or that...in a vacuum, at absolute zero, under infrared light...what does that have to do with the real world? It's like testing in an anechoic chamber, so what? IMO, the same holds true for eutectic solder, Teflon coatings, cat5 wiring, IEC cables, hospital-grade connectors...the reason they exist has ZERO to do with improved sound...

I still have my Fender Bandmaster from '66...tubes, still sounds good...as far as tubed audio gear, what really has changed? I don't know...they still use pretty much the same designs I'd guess...probably cold war Russian or Chinese tubes or NOS from how many years ago? You know why they still had tube technology, don't you? It had nothing to do with improving the breed per se. EMP...electromagnetic pulse from nuclear weapons.

But anywho, now with this segregation, what scared, little newbie is gonna' venture into the "SCIENCE LAB"? Not many I'd guess...they'll just hear about wires as tone controls, and the horrors of actual tone controls and all the rest and "there are likely a few folks who take statements like that at face value."

jimHJJ(...gotta' go make the donuts, or sumphin' like that...)

[E-Stat]

In case you missed it, I will detail my experiences over the past thirty years in audio.
Thanks, Mike but you are one of the few notable exceptions who freely provides such useful information. As are Pat D. and Skeptic. Others, well...make excuses.

rw

[E-Stat]

...Lord knows there is more than enough hype on both sides to go around...
Yep. Lots 'o flakes in the observationalist camp.


Now you certainly seem intelligent enough to realize there are those out there who are, in fact, gullible...who are seen as ripe for the picking by guys looking at their commission numbers...additionally, there are those who have to have the newest, the "best", the most expensive simply for the sake of saying so...I wouldn't hazard a guess as to numbers, but I suspect there are a great many who have more money than brains and are not truly "audiophiles" in anything but name only...expensive cars and "trophy" wives, that sorta' deal.
No disagreement here. My first new car was a '77 Trans Am. My first preference (since I like smaller cars) was a Scirocco, but my brother got me a deal anyway on the Firebird. "You need this sportmodel". When I picked it up, a fellow from work was there whose friend had also just bought one. Fast forward a year or so. I asked the friend how his buddy's car was. "He sold it". He sold it? Why? "He just bought it to get chicks. Now he's married and has a pickup". I was dumfounded because that perspective was (and is) totally foreign to me. Six months later after several failures on the Pontiac, I bought my first of many Hondas. My three vehicles remain Hondas.


There are a percentage of those who post here and elsewhere, who MUST include a laundry list of all the gear they own, as if it is supposed to mean something
Well it is a point of reference, but I get your drift. For those, that list is constantly changing in search of the holy grail or at least some form of enjoyment (that they will likely never find that way)


...the reason they exist has ZERO to do with improved sound..
Fine, but that doesn't discount filtered down benefits not originally planned. GPS was developed by the military for subs to be able to park a nuke on the Kremlin's doorstep. I regularly enjoys its usefulness today in my Acura for travels. Similarly, my system benefits from some aftermarket power cords that were facilitated by having IEC jacks on my components.


...as far as tubed audio gear, what really has changed? I don't know...they still use pretty much the same designs I'd guess...probably cold war Russian or Chinese tubes or NOS from how many years ago? You know why they still had tube technology, don't you? It had nothing to do with improving the breed per se. EMP...electromagnetic pulse from nuclear weapons.
Fundamentally, very little. The devil is in the details. I am aware of zero tube amps from the sixties with 200 joule power supplies, computer controlled output tube bias monitoring and correction circuits, refined single-tap transformers, mil-spec passive components used throughout, balanced input circuitry, and 800 watt output. Compare a VTL Siegfried to a Marantz 9 or a Mc 240 sometime.

As for Soviet technology, I will agree with the result, but not the cause. They simply lacked the solid state technology we possesed. I'm convinced that Kennedy's committment to put us on the moon is largely responsible for the accelerated development of miniaturized circuitry. When we got the first chance to examine the MiG-25 Foxbat up close following a pilot's defection, the engineers were amazed at how crude many aspects of the aircraft were. Although tube fanciers today, both guitar/PA amp and audiophile alike certainly benefit from the continued production of older tubes and the introduction into the mass market of previously classified Soviet military tubes such as the 6C33 output (used for aircraft radar) and the updated cousin to the 6922 twin triode, the 6H30. Ask Viktor Khomenko, designer of the fine BAT products whose family worked in the Svetlana tube production facility in St. Petersburg.


But anywho, now with this segregation, what scared, little newbie is gonna' venture into the "SCIENCE LAB"?
Most newbies don't want to know how to build a clock, just to read the time. For those who do, the answers are a couple of clicks away. I read nothing in the new guidelines to restrict any poster from stating their opinion, even if it is based on scientific studies alone. If worded in good taste and devoid of attacks to others, that is.

rw

[Resident Loser]

...check this out if you want to have a few nightmares:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/security/has197010.000/has197010_1.HTM

...it may be debatable, but if the EMP strategy of the Soviets was as indicated, my vote goes with design.

jimHJJ(...scary stuff the truth, if that's what it is...)

[E-Stat]

...check this out if you want to have a few nightmares:
I've seen Dr. Strangelove many a time. :)

rw

[nusiclover]

In case you missed it, I will detail my experiences over the past thirty years in audio.

Cabling

The only time I heard an audible difference in cabling is when I ran very long 18 gauge speaker wire to speakers in my basement. I upgraded to 12 gauge and the sound improved noticably. I have taken several types of expensive cabling home for trials and found no audible differences.

Turntables/Cartridges

This was in my youth but I do believe I did detect better sound with a very expensive cartridge I bought once. Those days are long gone.

CD Players

I have never detected any audible differences in CD players.

Amplifiers

This one is a little tricky since there is an obvious difference between tube and solid state. Also, larger amplifiers (e.g. bigger power supply and caps) will sound better on demanding speakers or at higher volumes. I do not believe most mid-fi SS amps sound different. I haven't tested high end amps.

Speakers

Every speaker system I have owned has sounded different.


And I qualify all of my opinions in that there was no single scientific test I did, simply listening in my own home on various peices of equipment.

Given my experience, if I were to lay a large sum of money out for an ass-kicking system I would dedicate a room in my house and treat it acoustically, purchase some of the very best speakers, place them correctly and then fill in the blanks with the appropriate source and amplification. I might even buy fancy looking cables just for the hell of it.


Since this is the LAB, and these conmversations are allowed, here goes my impressions:
Cabling: i have heard a difference in both interconnects and speaker cables. A clear difference at that.
Turntables: do not have one
CD Players: right now im using a toshiba DVD/ i have had a sony connected and could definitely hear that crispy annoying brights go away.
Amps: Yes. Even when comparing 2 solid states. I have heard a very distinguishable audio difference. However, one could argue that both SS amps had different Power Outputs.
Speakers: Yes. There is no arguing here.

Ok people. lets start this new board right and start putting down your personal experiences with Cables, Turntables, CDP's, Amps, Speakers.

[E-Stat]

Ok people. lets start this new board right and start putting down your personal experiences with Cables, Turntables, CDP's, Amps, Speakers.
I think you kinda miss the point of The Audio Lab. The primary focus here is that which can be substantiated with scientific studies or methodologies. Hopefully backed with the specific details by which that test was conducted.

My personal experiences here are merely anecdotal.

rw

[magictooth]

I think you kinda miss the point of The Audio Lab. The primary focus here is that which can be substantiated with scientific studies or methodologies. Hopefully backed with the specific details by which that test was conducted.

My personal experiences here are merely anecdotal.

rw
So, shouldn't you be deleting your posts from this forum as they are not in line with the topics that are supposed to be addressed here?

As an aside, everyone please post your comments about my possible solution to the new problems here at AR found here: http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=6409

[E-Stat]

So, shouldn't you be deleting your posts from this forum as they are not in line with the topics that are supposed to be addressed here?
Ok, I reread all my responses in this thread. Please cite the one(s) with which you are concerned.

rw

[magictooth]

Ok, I reread all my responses in this thread. Please cite the one(s) with which you are concerned.

rw
I think that any or all of them qualify as not being under the appropriate forum.
My personal responses are merely anecdotal.

rw

Although I tend to agree with much of what you say, I thought that the idea of separating the audio lab from the rest of the fora (or making pariahs out of many of the scientifically minded members) was so that the objective members here could have a meaningful discussions without having to deal with random interjections rained down on them from fairytale land.

As an aside here is there any way that you can make the default notification type "do not notify" instead of "email me when somebody responds."

[E-Stat]

I think that any or all of them qualify as not being under the appropriate forum.
I still have no idea as to what you are referring. Here is an analysis of my posts in this thread:

#4 I state the logical fallacy advanced by some ABX/DBT advocates
#6 Point out absence of DBT testing using high end gear
#9 Point out utter lack of ABX/DBT details found with popular "Russell" links
#13 There's some OT stuff here, but present features of updated tube technology
#17 Refuse to enter subjective opinion and steer nusiclover to solicit test results instead

In the other thread, I state in post #7 that I believe subjective comments don't belong here.


As an aside here is there any way that you can make the default notification type "do not notify" instead of "email me when somebody responds."
Forum Links-->My Profile-->Edit Options--->Default email notification

rw

[rb122]

I
I thought that the idea of separating the audio lab from the rest of the fora (or making pariahs out of many of the scientifically minded members) was so that the objective members here could have a meaningful discussions without having to deal with random interjections rained down on them from fairytale land.."

I think it's so that the subjectivists could have discussions without being "rained" upon by scientific theory. Whatever the reason, separating the two has made this an uninteresting place for me to be. But I've since discovered why I was truly on this board and I now see the point of the new regime.

E-Stat, after careful consideration of my motives and my interests, I now understand that I don't belong at A/R any longer. That's not a sob story at all! I think it's great that hobbyists can come and discuss their hobby, and if they choose to view only one side, it's at their own peril and the Big Benevolent Brother Theory needn't apply. However, I fall firmly in neither camp; I'm neither a scientist nor an audio maven. Frankly, discussions of audio gear bore me. I have my system, the finest I can afford, and have no desire to upgrade. As such, and as my motivation was learning both sides and enjoying the give and take of intelligent debate, I really have nothing to add to A/R and not much to take away.

I wish the moderators every success in their new endeavor! I hope that everyone keeps in mind that both the equipment and the theory behind it should always serve the music and not the other way around. Take care!

[magictooth]

Magictooth,

I inadvertently edited your post rather than supplying a reply. I'm accustomed to editing my own and as moderator, I am allowed to edit others. My mistake. Please correct.

"then the corollary to that would be that the objectivists should be able to have a discussion in the "audio lab" without having random interjections from yeasayers such as the ones that you have imposed on the scientific crowd in your posts listed above."

rw

[magictooth]

Magictooth,

I inadvertently edited your post rather than supplying a reply. I'm accustomed to editing my own and as moderator, I am allowed to edit others. My mistake. Please correct.

"then the corollary to that would be that the objectivists should be able to have a discussion in the "audio lab" without having random interjections from yeasayers such as the ones that you have imposed on the scientific crowd in your posts listed above."

rw
Ugh, well I remember the gist which was something like if you don't want naysayers saying anything about DBT in the other fora then the corollary to that is that yeasayers shouldn't really butt into what's going on in the audio lab. I think that I went on to say that you, E-Stat, as a moderator, should be able to see the hypocrisy of posting anti DBT snippets in the audio lab,and that if you cannot, then there's not much that I can say about the site. As well I think that you guys should look at my suggestion that I posted in the general forum. It is a very fair and equitable solution to the problems with the new guidelines.

[E-Stat]

Ugh, well I remember the gist which was something like if you don't want naysayers saying anything about DBT in the other fora then the corollary to that is that yeasayers shouldn't really butt into what's going on in the audio lab. I think that I went on to say that you, E-Stat, as a moderator, should be able to see the hypocrisy of posting anti DBT snippets in the audio lab,and that if you cannot, then there's not much that I can say about the site.
Sorry again for shredding your last post.

I find nothing in the new posting guidelines that restricts the asking of legitimate questions by an observationalist concerning details of scientific studies in this forum. Similarly, I will not comment here on my impressions of components. That is what I believe to be the spirit of what should and should not be posted here.

rw