What would it take to get this board moving again?

[E-Stat]

So my suggestion to change how the lab is used and how content is presented is not an option?

It is an option. The Lab was created for those who wish to discuss / debate scientific data. For some reason, such matters were not discussed in a civil way previously in the other forums.

rw

[Resident Loser]

It is an option. The Lab was created for those who wish to discuss / debate scientific data. For some reason, such matters were not discussed in a civil way previously in the other forums.

rw

...it takes two to tango...mtry always brought up DBTs as a response to the anecdotal and another member would then refer to him as a chihuahua...

Fact trumps tall tales and no insults were sourced in simply questioning biases, no matter how much of a harrangue some might perceive the act to be...

jimHJJ(...some folks just get offensive when confronted with reality...)

[E-Stat]

...it takes two to tango...mtry always brought up DBTs as a response to the anecdotal and another member would then refer to him as a chihuahua...

A chihuahua? Well, I'll have to say that isn't the strongest language I've seen here.

Fact trumps tall tales and no insults were sourced in simply questioning biases,...

Indeed. I pointed that out to mtry on more than one occasion.

Limited tests

Forty minutes later, he still didn't understand his logical fallacy

Missing the point

rw

[Resident Loser]

A chihuahua? Well, I'll have to say that isn't the strongest language I've seen here.


Indeed. I pointed that out to mtry on more than one occasion.

Limited tests

Forty minutes later, he still didn't understand his logical fallacy

Missing the point

rw

...one could always surmise that the dearth of newer studies on the subject might be a direct result of not wanting to "bite the hand that feeds". '83? The timeframe seems about right to me. Perhaps no one in the industry wishes to do that, after all we're all makin' money, right...So we leave it to folks like Roger Russell, Rod Elliot and a few others or mfrs. like Klipsch who grudgingly add "bi-wire capability" at the markets' behest.

And for some reason, I thought the burden of proof was, and still is, on the party(ies) making the claim...I can't prove what I don't hear ergo...

jimHJJ(...Which goes 'round and 'round and ends up nowhere...)

[E-Stat]

...one could always surmise that the dearth of newer studies on the subject might be a direct result of not wanting to "bite the hand that feeds". '83?

Why the nefarious motivation? I think the answer is far simpler for every kind of audio component. It is expensive to conduct truly scientifically valid tests and to what end? If $10,000 amplifiers are truly no better than a $200 pro amp, then why don't the low end companies "prove" that once and for all and increase their sales? Why doesn't Blue Jeans cable compare their stuff to Nordost Valhalla, prove theirs is just as good and end up owning the business? Or Bose with their deep pockets prove that the Wave Radio outperforms multi-thousand dollar systems? Out of hundreds, if not thousands, of audio companies producing all sorts of components, I rarely - if ever see mention of the results of DB testing to promote their products.

Why are DBTs considered unimportant as selling tools by the entire industry?

...like Klipsch who grudgingly add "bi-wire capability" at the markets' behest.

Speaking of proof, what is the proof of this assertion?

rw

[Resident Loser]

Why the nefarious motivation? I think the answer is far simpler for every kind of audio component. It is expensive to conduct truly scientifically valid tests and to what end? If $10,000 amplifiers are truly no better than a $200 pro amp, then why don't the low end companies "prove" that once and for all and increase their sales? Why doesn't Blue Jeans cable compare their stuff to Nordost Valhalla, prove theirs is just as good and end up owning the business? Or Bose with their deep pockets prove that the Wave Radio outperforms multi-thousand dollar systems? Out of hundreds, if not thousands, of audio companies producing all sorts of components, I rarely - if ever see mention of the results of DB testing to promote their products.

...the circle...be unbroken? I guess not, eh?

Is that $10K amp fifty times better than the $200 model? In a recent thread Krell was brought up. An integrated amp rated @200W into 8 Ohms or 400W into a 4ohm load (unfortunately nowhere in their literature can I determine if that's a per channel number or combined output)...Now doubling the power rating is impressive these days. but my trusty, vintage HK Citation 19 does the same thing, it's MSRP was around one quarter the price AND it has an ultra-wide bandwidth, something the Krell does not. I haven't had any complaints...with good software, I hear what can only be described with the usual audiophilic jargon re: depth, detail ad nauseum...And insofar as value, what exactly comprises value?...as an integrated the Krell falls short on what I consider important features: No pre-out/power-in facilities (their theater throughput notwithstanding, it may be remote accessible but 't'aint the same), limited record/copy jacks/switching, no phono pre-, no tone controls (and as previously stated, not all software is created equal). So, while the power may be remarkable, the unit is of no value to me...

Blue Jeans vs. Nordost? Has the former compared themself to the latter? I plead ignorance. Not in the market...still p!ssed at the Polk Cobras I bought a lifetime ago and I'm perfectly content with both my Discwasher ICs and 10gauge...From what I seen, BJ claims to be made of stout stuff at a reasonable price...while some hi-zoot wire companies remove the "made in China" labels or have their wonderous terminating networks revealed to be potted, run-of-the-mill caps and resistors...Insofar as Nordost is concerned, I recall Eyespy, who claimed to use that mfrs. wire, say he heard no difference, but used them in his system simply because he was expected to...plus they looked good...

And Bose? Well, we are all cogniscent of their marketing...and I'm curious, perhaps I'm incorrect, but aren't those cost/performance statements from reviewers or customers. Is the Wave Radio's performance far beyond what much of the general public is normally subjected to vis a' vis audio?...And while they (Bose) are ultimately responsible for what appears in their ads, it's really no different than any of the "unsolicited" accolades seen in much of the high-end marketing hype...Can wires provide more bass? Can they improve the soundstage or depth? Are they really an outgrowth of technologies that sent men to the moon? I've seen those claims also...

Which marketeering ploy should be subject of closer scrutiny?

Speaking of proof, what is the proof of this assertion? rw

To answer that, we'd have to go back to those thrilling days of yesteryear...of Eyespy, Monstrous Mike, mtrycrafts...somewhere in the archives, there are transcripts of a few e-mails between one of the then members and Klipsch regarding the subject...

jimHJJ(...as always, interesting...)

[E-Stat]

So, while the power may be remarkable, the unit is of no value to me...

So, why doesn't Panasonic capitalize on the shortcomings you mention? Our $200 XR receiver is just as good as the high priced Krell spread? They don't. No one has ever tried to exploit the "facts".

...still p!ssed at the Polk Cobras I bought a lifetime ago...

They did cause quite a firestorm with the unhappy results on many amps with their extremely high capacitance. Blew up quite a few they did.

Jbut used them in his system simply because he was expected to...plus they looked good...

Expected to? By whom?

I'm curious, perhaps I'm incorrect, but aren't those cost/performance statements from reviewers or customers.

Exactly. Why not prove their case with DBTs?

Can they improve the soundstage or depth?

Improve? No. In my experience, some can retain more of the signal's cues that provide such.

somewhere in the archives, there are transcripts of a few e-mails between one of the then members and Klipsch regarding the subject...

So someone spoke with an engineer at Klipsch and was told we "begrudgingly" added biwiring capability?

rw

[Dusty Chalk]

A chihuahua? Well, I'll have to say that isn't the strongest language I've seen here.

I don't know -- I hate chihuahuas...

[StevenSurprenant]

The theory that wires are wires is valid according the types of tests that we perform on them. There is no valid scientific reasoning to support the concept that wires do sound different. However, I and, as far as I can tell, most people that have tried different wires hear differences to varying degrees. The wire is wire crowd claims these differences are in our minds brought on by expectations, marketing, and so on.

The double blind test is flawed in many ways. It changes the conditions on every level. The environment is changed, the stereo is changed the wires are changed, etc... Everyone who makes these claims do so, usually at home in with their system that they are intimately familiar with. To have them go somewhere else with new equipment changes all the conditions, all at once. This is not good science.

When I have proposed different ways to prove the claim that wire is wire, I was ignored. It seems that the only valid test for the wire is wire crowd in the DBT. Again, it is not good science. A theory is only valid if it can stand up to rigorous testing by any means devised, as long as the test is valid.

I'm sure that many people here can devise different ways to support their stance other than the DBT. It seems that only one testing method is validity enough for them. One test is not good science, period!

This is why people scoff at the claims that wire is wire.

I want to know if you are right, but I will not support a DBT because of its inherent flaws.

I spend eleven years in the chemical industry developing products with new properties that were based on existing products. We didn't do a complete reformulation, we modified one aspect of the process and measured the results. This is good science.

Well, best wishes to eveyone.

Have fun picking this apart...