You guys ought to publish your theories!

[Siper2]

Okay, so this is somewhat off-topic, but ... I had an idea.

Three years ago I used to frequent these forums quite a lot. I had a 12-hour night shift job with Net access available, and usually had nothing else to do. (I miss those days. ;-)
I started reading all of the posts about cable overhype in retail and the media, and was somewhat taken aback, as I suppose most people are. Companies--and standards--like "Monster Cable" are so integrated into our purchasing history, that we frequently don't even think twice about purchasing. It's that last thing you grab on the way to the counter, and never forget to pick up. But of course, that's the success of their marketing, yet the failure at the same time, when it comes to informing the public.

I suppose it's somewhat like allopathic medicine. It's something you're bombarded with from birth--you're shot up with vaccines, given doses of "x" or "y" for every conceivable sniffle, but never taught about prevention. Never taught that, hey guess what, you weren't born with a medicine chest... so maybe you don't need it as much as you think. My wife is a doctor of chiropractic, and some chiros are doing a much better job at educating people about how you DON'T need most of the stuff you take, that it's baffling. Naturally, since it's a relatively young profession--and the medical guys hate it, mostly for reasons they'd never admit to--most people snub the notions. But it's changing: entire legions of parents are protesting vaccinations because of their chemical contents. People are starting to take exercise and preventative healthcare much more seriously. (In other words, we're finally learning from old countries like Japan, who've known all along.)

People are realizing that what we've been taught, has mostly been bogus.

Since that's one aspect of my life I inadvertently get involved with often, I thought I'd bring it up, just to show the similarities. There are some constants and exceptions. Pardon what may be a poor analogy: in healthcare, you'll always need foundations like emergency care. In soundsystems, you'll always need foundations like quality power units, proper gauge cable, and decent drivers.

So I'm reading through these forums, particularly this one for its heated nature, and thought.... "Some of these guys ought to get together and publish something." I haven't read a single review/editorial/whatever in a big-name bookstore magazine about any of these debunking theories. Why? Poor marketing, naturally. They'd never write that, they'd lose advertising.

It's the independent publications that would have to bring these theories to the public.
Slap me on the wrist if there's been a larger-scale effort already, and I simply don't know about it. I love to write... Mostly, I love to write about things that interest me. Audio. Cars. Photography. The ocean. Whatever. If enough people have the technical information, if enough people have the marketing talent, if enough people have the writing and editorial ability, and if a few people are willing to contribute to the finances, this would work.

Anybody game?

=Chris

[skeptic]

My theories about wire are already published.....
In every standard textbook of electrical engineering which deals with transmission lines. They are all the same. And the people who make wire for real, not for audiophiles read, use, and publish the same theories.

When alternate theories arise to challenge those that are widely accepted by engineers and scientists come up and can demonstrate that they show a greater truth than the existing theories, they will supplant them. But it is a very arduous process requiring sound mathematical modeling and objective testing to prove themselves worthy, not by audiophiles but by other engineers and scientists. They must prove both their technical value and their worth in real life use. Until they do, all of the hype and baloney may get them sales from tyro consumers but the people who count will continue to hold them up to derision and ridicule they so well deserve.

[Siper2]

I'm not so convinced that you'd need hardcore, arduous proof of anything if an audio publication were attempted. After all, the folks here say that there's no proof ever published in favor of expensive cabling, so why should it be required to the opposite?

Credibility? Certainly it would make the process easier, but it would at least put forth a challenge. I do know that of course all the electrical manuals and teaching books have all the info anyone would ever need.... but such is the case with most things. Those types of publications, however, are NOT what people use. Textbook research is not for the general public, when it comes to putting something together for people to see, for an objective viewpoint.

Anyone who looks at something widely accepted, and thinks on it from an objective or opposing angle, would hopefully think to look to the source material (i.e. textbooks) for fact. However, they'd first need to know exactly where to look. Which is why some kind of summation of facts might be great.

I don't know... I'm just throwing ideas out.

[skeptic]

"Those types of publications, however, are NOT what people use. Textbook research is not for the general public,"

It depends on what "people" you are refering to. It's what engineers and scientists use. In the case of technology, the trickle down theory applies. When new knowledge is acquired through genuine research by competent people, it is published in scientific and engineering professional journals. Papers are presented at symposiums and conventons. Other professionals review it, critique it, try to duplicate the results, and generaly tear it apart. If it stands up to such scrutiny and survives as genuine new knowledge, it finds its way into subsequent texts and becomes the new prevailing theory of how the universe works. If it finds its way into consumer publications, it is invariably watered down and simplified so that people not trained in that technical discipline can understand it.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulates what is deemed fair advertising by insisting that claims for product performance be backed up by scientific knowledge in advance of any advertising. There are no exceptions or alternatives. The fact that manufacturers of some kinds of products have successfully gotten around the FTC rules by implying or leading prospective customers to believe that they are getting something that isn't explicitly promised or that the FTC hasn't stepped into one or another particular industry because its priorities are set elsewhere is not important to the truth but the existance of these products on the market as a trap for unsuspecting consumers is a fact of life. Furthermore, consumer magazines whose advertising revenues come in part from the advertisers of such products do not welcome articles which challenge the validity of their merit. Stereo Review Magazine published such and article about 20 or 30 years ago demonstrating that there was no significant difference between Monster Cable of the time and ordinary 16 gage lamp cord for loudspeakers. The advertising department saw to it that they never made that mistake again.

[Siper2]

I know how the system works when it comes to research material.

"General public" meaning non-engineers.


Would your average person rip through 4,000 pages of medical journals to find information on proper care for a skin condition? No. They want easy-to-find, consolidated material.


I just don't think any exists, for this information you guys have. And it's good stuff. Think of the money it would save people.

[skeptic]

"Would your average person rip through 4,000 pages of medical journals to find information on proper care for a skin condition? No. They want easy-to-find, consolidated material."

They'd be much smarter to go to a doctor who can make an accurate diagnosis and prescribe the most effective treatment as a result of an informed judgement made after years of professional training rather than play doctor by diagnosing and prescribing for themselves. Luckily for most people, most illnesses are not serious and are self limiting which means they will get better with or without medical intervention. When it is serious, failure to get the right help at the earliest time could spell the difference between life and death.

Unfortunately, you are right about the majority of publications in audio for consumers today being somewhat off the wall and misleading. It's as though the herbologists and homeopaths had a monopoly on all of the medical publications while the mainstream medical doctors and pharmacologists which solve the overwhelming majority of our medical problems were nowhere to be heard.

BTW, after a car accident 14 years ago, I had extensive chiropractic treatment myself and I know that for some conditions at least, it works very well.

[mtrycraft]

My wife is a doctor of chiropractic,


Sorry to hear that.

and some chiros are doing a much better job at educating people about how you DON'T need most of the stuff you take, that it's baffling.

Yes, it would baffle me too to hear such nonsense if I walked into such an office which will not happen in my lifetime.

Naturally, since it's a relatively young profession--and the medical guys hate it,

No, what they hate is cleaning up after them or any alternative practices when a patient is in extremis and these bogus delivery systems have failed them so miserably.

mostly for reasons they'd never admit to--most people snub the notions.

Yep, count me in.

But it's changing: entire legions of parents are protesting vaccinations because of their chemical contents.

Chemical contet? Wake up. Everything has CHEMICAL CONTENT.

Oh, you know what happens when they rebuff and give out such stupid advice against vaccination? How would they know? They don't read the consequences of polio making a comeback, or any desease that was almost wiped out. What a moronic advice. They should be sued to an inch of their lives for malpractice.

People are starting to take exercise and preventative healthcare much more seriously.

Because the chiros are convincing them? Doctors have not? LOL.

(In other words, we're finally learning from old countries like Japan, who've known all along.)

Know what? I suppose you want to include Chinese medicines? I suppose they are crazy to fall head over heal for western medicines?

People are realizing that what we've been taught, has mostly been bogus.

No, it is people like this profession who are the bogus practitioners of well being.

Since that's one aspect of my life I inadvertently get involved with often, I thought I'd bring it up, just to show the similarities.


Yes, very similar indeed. A little knowledge is so dangerous indeed. Prey on the gullible public. I love it.

in healthcare, you'll always need foundations like emergency care.

Why would that be the case with this belief system? Don't chiros have emergency treatment hours? Why not? Or, when the rubber meets the road, back to the old reliable medical care. You just got to love this nonsense.