Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 68 of 68
  1. #51
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    I find it interesting that passions involving cables run so deep that two giants of audio who have contributed far more to audio than any of us web junkies will ever dream of are referred to as "whores".

    I find it sad.
    mtrycrafts

  2. #52
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    ........Thanks bturk667. Which Nordost cables do you use and can you tell me how much $?

    Too much for what it just cannot do, has not been demonstrated it can do.




    I'm looking for something that will tone the treble region down somewhat without spending a whole lot.........Zapr.

    Use your tone control, it is free. Or, add a resistor in the line, maybe a 1/2 ohm, will tame your treble, about a $1. Or, cover your tweeter, free.
    .........Picked up a couple resistors today. 1.50 per. Did the trick quite nicely.........Zapr.

  3. #53
    Forum Regular Sealed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    189
    [QUOTE=mtrycraft][
    I didn't know John Dunlavy had a brother Richard.

    Possibly I was talking over my left shoulder with a friend who met Richard Vandersteen while I was typing about Dunlavy.

    I believe that cables are in essence, a tone filter.

    Well, if you want fractional dB differences on the order of .2-.5dB, go for it. Good luck hearing it.

    MIT was quite audible. It removed anything resembling treble from a couple different systems we tried it on. It was not subtle, and it was easy to conclude that MIT wasn't for me. It's easy to hear. But MIT isn't "just wire" they have components inline also. Obviously an induced resistance.


    I believe the compensate for system nasties.

    Same as above.

    They can, by rolling off the treble response. That's easy to hear, and measure.

    That does not mean I endorse expensive cables.

    You just endores ineffective tone controls.

    Wanna -be tone controls that I don't subscribe to.

    I think it is obscene and criminal for NBS to charge $30,000 for cables. $3000 is obscene for that matter, it's just wire!!! $3000 will get you a killer source component or speakers that will make a BIG difference, not a cable that makes a small one.=

    Ah, now we're quibbling about price?

    Yes, wanna make something of it skeptic-boy? Do you always have to take the opportunity to be a twit in every post? People would actually take you more seriously if you didn't try to be Fear3000. I have been waiting for years for you to provide us with a list of your reference-class stereo main system from which you make all your assertions. I bet it's less accurate and neutral and revealing than mine, ergo less valid of a test bed. Lets hear it, you have JBL speakers, Denon reciever and what sources?


    Your system goes flat, because a lot of the signal is radiated into space.

    What? where did you get this nonsense? You have zero evidence for this either measured effect or audible effect of this.

    --It's measurable. Poor insulation, parallel conductors= radiated loss. The DNM speaker cable output is a lot less than the input. I have test equiptment at my shop that measure everything from spectral analysis to micro signal levels. Do you? with what are you making measurements?

    I have some old Audioquest cables that work exceptionally well. They are based on a helically wound copper, insulated by teflon, and again around the conductors by polypropelene. These can be found used for a few bucks. But they have exceptionally low R/C charactaristics, and exceptional shieilding.


    Great A few bucks sounds good to me.

    So that's the key, we are quibbling about price? It MUST be cheap to be good?

    You tend to blend as much fact, with extreme bias, fallacy, ego and irrelevance as anyone else. You disguise it by being a Peter Aczel wanna be. You throw rocks at everyone (Like Romy the cat) but when confronted and challenged to list your own system truthfully, you "pussy out"...much like that other guy...You have repeatedly deflected and dodged questions in the lamest manner possible. "Oh it's irrelevent..." well at least FEAR3000 had a revealing system and would post his gear on the web. You on the other hand fling rocks, and then cower away. If people knew you have a relentlessly midfi system, it would let a lot of your hot air out. And you are afraid of that. your real credibility lies not in simple resistive measurements. It also depends on:
    1) Quality and accuracy of the system you own. Which I a skeptical that you have one , or know what one sounds like.

    2) That you are not actually tone deaf as I have suspected for years.

    Compiling the data from your posts (before and after you got banned for a while) I can make a strong case for saying you just can't hear, because you have abnormally poor hearing. That is a very good possibility. But again, good hearing is irrelevent if you have mediocre equiptment in which to form an opinion to cast rocks.
    Last edited by Sealed; 03-09-2004 at 11:22 PM.

  4. #54
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    583
    It was his company wasn't it? So he should have stood up for what he believed in. I do not buy your argument.
    Remember, different isn't always better, but it is different.
    Keep things as simple as possible, but not too simple.
    Let your ears decide for you!

  5. #55
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by bturk667
    It was his company wasn't it? So he should have stood up for what he believed in. I do not buy your argument.

    His company? Or, he just works there as an exec of research?
    mtrycrafts

  6. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    MIT was quite audible. It removed anything resembling treble from a couple different systems we tried it on. It was not subtle, and it was easy to conclude that MIT wasn't for me. It's easy to hear. But MIT isn't "just wire" they have components inline also. Obviously an induced resistance.

    You should read the patent on the cable which is useless. The cable box is a filter for RF, not audio signals.
    I'd rather see a DBT compariosn to be sure of differences.


    They can, by rolling off the treble response. That's easy to hear, and measure.

    Only if it is large enough magnitude. The, the cable is a poor design, broken cable.



    I have been waiting for years for you to provide us with a list of your reference-class stereo main system from which you make all your assertions. I bet it's less accurate and neutral and revealing than mine, ergo less valid of a test bed. Lets hear it, you have JBL speakers, Denon reciever and what sources?

    Irrelevant, especially as I make no claims for audibility of anything. It is you who has to demonstrate audibility, YES. You cannot pass the burden of proof. It will remain in your court until you stop making claims for differences unsupported by credible evidence.



    --It's measurable.

    What is measured?



    Poor insulation, parallel conductors= radiated loss.

    Poor insulation causes losses? Hogwash. parallel conductors with signals in opposite direction tends to cancell out most everything. And, if you can measure it, doesn't mean a thing that it robs your speakers of signal, LOL.



    The DNM speaker cable output is a lot less than the input.

    How much? Inductance and resistance has nothing to do with it? Really? And, so what. Turn up the volume control by 1/2dB.



    I have test equiptment at my shop that measure everything from spectral analysis to micro signal levels.

    Good for you. And the results are? Caused by what? Magnetic field radiation? LOL. Where did the resistance loss, inductance loos gone? Mythology?



    but when confronted and challenged to list your own system truthfully,

    You Just Don't Get IT!!! I don't really need a system, not even a boom box, to make comment here, take you to task to prove your fantastic claims of fancy. Try to remember that, what I have has no relevance on what you can hear or cannot hear and claim to hear. ZERO.


    well at least FEAR3000 had a revealing system

    You you claim it to be revealing? Based on name brand or demonstrably revealing? Prove it.



    If people knew you have a relentlessly midfi system, it would let a lot of your hot air out.


    Ah, facts are established by what I have or don't have. What you can hear and claim to hear. LOL. You are too funny for words.


    It also depends on:
    1) Quality and accuracy of the system you own. Which I a skeptical that you have one , or know what one sounds like.
    2) That you are not actually tone deaf as I have suspected for years.


    Hogwash. All it depends on is what you can demonstrate, unbiased. You have no evidence of that, hence you have unreliable hype, nothing more.
    Why don't you just pretend I am deaf altogether. That will put you out of your misery waiting for what I have or don't have.

    Compiling the data from your posts (before and after you got banned for a while)

    Really?



    I can make a strong case for saying you just can't hear, because you have abnormally poor hearing. That is a very good possibility. .


    Then it is settled. No need to agonize anymore what I don't have. But, you are still on th ehot seat to demonstrate your claims for audibility. Rather simple. Your court, cannot leave your court. Check mate.
    mtrycrafts

  7. #57
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    He has to my knowledge never even claimed to have conducted DBTs on cables. If you know otherwise, please enlighten me.
    Email him. Simple. His email is at the web site for Harman.
    mtrycrafts

  8. #58
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    365
    You should read the patent on the cable which is useless. The cable box is a filter for RF, not audio signals.
    I'd rather see a DBT compariosn to be sure of differences.


    And how do you know the particular model cable he was listening to employed that particular patent?

    Irrelevant, especially as I make no claims for audibility of anything. It is you who has to demonstrate audibility, YES. You cannot pass the burden of proof. It will remain in your court until you stop making claims for differences unsupported by credible evidence.

    You make such claims almost daily with the unqualified advice you give here to newcomers. It would be one thing if you simply pointed out to them the lack of proof. But you go beyond that and for all intents and purposes make absolute claims that cables don't make a difference.

    I for one believe it to be highly irresponsible for you to set your self up as an authority and pontificate on audible differences in the form and manner that you do without revealing who you are, what your background is and what kind of system you have.

    Your dodge is wearing thin. It works if all you did is refer to the test results (of course, it would be nice if you were honest about it while doing it and point out the flaws in the protocol and statistical analysis and disclose your own level of expertise in evaluating such matters), but when you choose to play with the big boys and start giving unqualified advice about audibility of cables then you have crossed the line where the unwritten (and I believe extremely fair) code says if you're going to spout off about such things you had better let people know your own personal point of reference.

  9. #59
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    I for one believe it to be highly irresponsible for you to set your self up as an authority and pontificate on audible differences in the form and manner that you do without revealing who you are, what your background is and what kind of system you have.
    What are you setting yourself up as?
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  10. #60
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    Your (Mtrycrafts) dodge is wearing thin.
    What dodge? He has nothing to dodge. People who claim cables are magical are the ones doing the dodging.

    And further, it is very resposible advice to say you only need basic cables in your audio system. Show me how that is not reponsible advice. On the other hand, advising people to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars based on in-home "experience" is very irresponsible advice.

    Besides, any advice given here is at your own risk anyways so why all the personal attacks? What have you got against people giving their opinion?
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  11. #61
    Forum Regular Sealed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    [b]
    They can, by rolling off the treble response. That's easy to hear, and measure.

    Only if it is large enough magnitude. The, the cable is a poor design, broken cable.
    large enough is easy enough to do. Doesn't have to be broken cable. Just has to induce resistance or loss, which many do.


    I have been waiting for years for you to provide us with a list of your reference-class stereo main system from which you make all your assertions. I bet it's less accurate and neutral and revealing than mine, ergo less valid of a test bed. Lets hear it, you have JBL speakers, Denon reciever and what sources?

    Irrelevant, especially as I make no claims for audibility of anything. It is you who has to demonstrate audibility, YES. You cannot pass the burden of proof. It will remain in your court until you stop making claims for differences unsupported by credible evidence.

    ROTFLMAO!!! You are as easy to read and predict as a comic book! I *KNEW* you would take the pussy route! You backed out just as I said you would. It makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD YOU DISINGENOUS HYPOCRIT! You make claims every damn post that no one can hear the difference in anything.

    The gospel according to the pussy-out, disingenuous, hyprocritical, deaf MTRY "cop out" crafts: Matra repeated ad nauseum since the 90's:
    1- All cd players sound the same
    2. cables make no difference
    3. amps make no difference

    Of course they don't you JBL owning 7-11 manager! You have no equipment that is revealing or resoloute enough for you to hear any difference. You are obviously tone deaf, and have never heard a revealing system. you have contradicted yourself throughout the years (anyone can look up your posts and prove this.) you are simply raging against the machine citing only partially meaningful test and measure claptrap. Fact is, you do not possess equiptment of a decent calibre that can discern differences, and there is no doubt that you have hearing problems and cannot hear anything anyway.



    --It's measurable.

    What is measured?

    Roll off. Loss . The FR curve.

    Poor insulation, parallel conductors= radiated loss.

    Poor insulation causes losses? Hogwash. parallel conductors with signals in opposite direction tends to cancell out most everything. And, if you can measure it, doesn't mean a thing that it robs your speakers of signal, LOL.

    LOL? I am laughing my ass off at you, trying to obfuscate the matter and PUSSY OUT when confronted ...like a little punk. There is such thing as radiated loss, capicitive loss, inductive loss, and copper loss. They all reduce signal integrity you dimwit.



    The DNM speaker cable output is a lot less than the input.

    How much? Inductance and resistance has nothing to do with it? Really? And, so what. Turn up the volume control by 1/2dB.

    That just makes it louder, and just as flat ...like your head.



    I have test equiptment at my shop that measure everything from spectral analysis to micro signal levels.

    Good for you. And the results are? Caused by what? Magnetic field radiation? LOL. Where did the resistance loss, inductance loos gone? Mythology?

    You are living on another planet, appearently totally occupied by deaf *******s, and you are obviously king. You are obviously not an EE, and obviously a disingenous prick, and a pussy for throwing rocks and not walking the walk. Get a life you idiot.



    but when confronted and challenged to list your own system truthfully,

    You Just Don't Get IT!!! I don't really need a system, not even a boom box, to make comment here, take you to task to prove your fantastic claims of fancy. Try to remember that, what I have has no relevance on what you can hear or cannot hear and claim to hear. ZERO.

    It has every relevence you dense prick. You tell everyone what they CAN'T hear. The only one that can't hear is you you deaf asswipe.


    well at least FEAR3000 had a revealing system

    You you claim it to be revealing? Based on name brand or demonstrably revealing? Prove it.

    We all have hearing ability which you do not possess. It's called normal hearing. Fear3000 had a system based on Dunlavy speakers, high quality front end both digital and vinyl. Any flaw or coloration is immediatly obvious to those of us with normal hearing.


    If people knew you have a relentlessly midfi system, it would let a lot of your hot air out.


    Ah, facts are established by what I have or don't have. What you can hear and claim to hear. LOL. You are too funny for words.

    You are too ****ing stupid for words. You claim to be mr a/b/x and readily burn down people for the choices they make. Just because you are completely deaf and have NO concept whatsoever what constitutes revealing, and detail. The fact is, you are a deaf ******* with an axe to grind. You are mad because of your stunted hearing ability and want to take it out on the entire world. You are NOT a debunker, you are just a ****ing prick.


    It also depends on:
    1) Quality and accuracy of the system you own. Which I a skeptical that you have one , or know what one sounds like.
    2) That you are not actually tone deaf as I have suspected for years.


    Hogwash. All it depends on is what you can demonstrate, unbiased. You have no evidence of that, hence you have unreliable hype, nothing more.
    Why don't you just pretend I am deaf altogether. That will put you out of your misery waiting for what I have or don't have.

    All you have is an axe to grind, and no hearing ability. Your assertions are far beyond worthless at best, asinine at least. You are pretentious as hell, and a wart on the ass of audio boards everywhere.

    Compiling the data from your posts (before and after you got banned for a while)

    Really?
    Yes..they are all in history you jackass.



    I can make a strong case for saying you just can't hear, because you have abnormally poor hearing. That is a very good possibility. .


    Then it is settled. No need to agonize anymore what I don't have. But, you are still on th ehot seat to demonstrate your claims for audibility. Rather simple. Your court, cannot leave your court. Check mate.
    There is no check mate. You have been crowned queen of the hypocritical **** for brains. I hope you and your ***** Romy live happily ever after.

  12. #62
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Didn't think you woule have an intelligent response. You proved me right. Must be psychic as well. I will now try for the Randi prize.
    When you have something of real value to offer, please contribute.
    mtrycrafts

  13. #63
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    6

    Angry Here we go....

    Quote Originally Posted by Sealed

    You throw rocks at everyone (Like Romy the cat) but when confronted and challenged to list your own system truthfully, you "pussy out"...much like that other guy...You have repeatedly deflected and dodged questions in the lamest manner possible
    Hm, you apparently know Romy and had opportunity to evaluate personally his idiocy. Or perhaps you was one of many Morons that Romy sent to screw themselves in order do not was his time on the socializing with the fertile cretins? Or perhaps you are familiar with Romy via the Rush Limbaugh broadcasts, the Rod Doorack barking or the Bruce Righter’s intelligence? Probably instead of boosting your pterodactyl-like cleverness and dropping Romy name you should to shut up and keep talking with Fear3000- he is a specially accommodated for the conversation with such a Morons like you.

    The Cat

  14. #64
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    Audiophiles are people who sit in front of their two speakers for hours on end the way most other boobs sit in front of TVs.
    Yikes. Perhaps audiophiles should turn off their systems once and awhile and watch the Discovery Channel and learn something.


    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    The vast majority of audiophiles have always made decisions based on what they perceive to make improvements in their systems that were worth the cost of these improvements. They care about how their own system sounds to them - they don't care about the science or lack of science in back of what they do. Moreover, they make their decisions consistent with the way they listen - sighted and non-scientifically.
    People make perception decisions when it comes to art, decorating your home, gettting a haircut, buying wine. Most people do not make perceptions decisions when souping up their car, rebuilding their roof, or buying new hardware for their computer. I think it might be more accurate for you to say that audiophiles do not care if their system sounds the same after a change, only that they perceive an improvement and are thus "happier".


    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    Let me make myself perfectly clear. I do not believe anyone on this board or on any audio board has ever really dealt with audio DBTs in a valid, scientific manner. There are difficult statistical issues involved. In addition, the validity of tests is dependent upon the expertise behind the tests. The required expertise is not engineering. Rather it comes more from psychologists. And as far as I can tell there are virtually no people who possess the degree of expertise in the proper disciplines that would be required to set up, hold or opinine on valid blind testing as applied to cables (or for that matter all other components) who ever post on the internet.
    Probably true. But audiophiles do hold the upper hand because their own home listening results trump everything else. Maybe the security of that is the reason they will not let it go. But that would require the psychologist to verify.
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  15. #65
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
    I have second hand knowledge that he has conducted DBTs on speaker wires. When he was designing speakers and testing them, he wanted to make sure all of the variables in his DBTs on speakers were controlled and that included the cables. He found that cables did not affect the sound of his speakers.

    I cannot verify this story but I have no reason to doubt the person that told me this.
    Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.
    "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
    ------Heraclitus of Ephesis (fl. 504-500 BC), trans. Wheelwright.

  16. #66
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat D
    Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.
    Thanks, Pat. And I honestly believe that he went into such testing with a completely open mind with his only goal being to determine if he should be using a certain type (i.e. optimal) of speaker wire for his speaker DBT tests.
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  17. #67
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
    Thanks, Pat. And I honestly believe that he went into such testing with a completely open mind with his only goal being to determine if he should be using a certain type (i.e. optimal) of speaker wire for his speaker DBT tests.

    Of course. He is a scientis and wanted to be sure his research will have meaning by checking all the links in the chain and their effects.
    mtrycrafts

  18. #68
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat D
    Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.

    When did you exchange with him? What time period did Toole do this? Was any of it published in that magazine back then?
    mtrycrafts

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Great Cable Debate
    By happy ears in forum Cables
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 07-16-2013, 09:31 AM
  2. Three Cables, Two Months, One Baby
    By Mwalsdor_cscc_edu in forum Cables
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-03-2003, 07:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •