Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Machina Dynamica "Codename Turquoise"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Machina Dynamica "Codename Turquoise" - Page 3

post #31 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarinthegourd View Post
Machina Dynamica was obviously started as a joke, a "how absurd can we make a product and still have 'audiophiles' buy it" prank. They must have been delightfully amazed to have people take their products seriously, let alone buy them!
I really wish MD released sales figures. The reason is the one product that they have sold that probably works (their "mass dampeners" i.e. an incredibly heavy slab of granite supported on springs) seems to be the least mentioned.



Assuming mass dampeners effect sound quality, it really seems like it would be a great solution. Granite is dirt cheap compared to what audiophile mass dampeners go for, and it looks very nice.
post #32 of 63
Gold bricks are denser and heavier than granite.

See ya
Steve
post #33 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
. . . and coming from a guy who, I'd wager, has never tried Codename Turquoise . . . ?
This guy has a point, a bunch of people who buy into super expensive cables will say this, but suddenly when it applies to a "true" snake oil (hint, this doesnt exist) product, it doesnt apply anymore.

Oh what a hypocritical world cable people live in.
post #34 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
So we won't KNOW the sun will rise tomorrow morning until around 5:30 AM? Perhaps I shouldn't make any appointments until I know for sure.

See ya
Steve
That is so ridiculously not analogous to what we have been speaking of that you, if you were capable of it, should be ashamed of yourself. In the unlikely case it needs to be explained to you, you have tried out the sunrise 1000's of times before and have that knowledge to call on in predicting what will happen tomorrow. You have never tried out Codename Turquoise before, so have nothing to base any knowing on.

However, inductive proofs, e.g., of the certainty of tomorrow's sunrise because it has always risen, have been known for literally ages to be imperfect logically. So indeed the next sunrise can only be said to be extremely likely even though its appearance has a perfect record so far. You can imagine events that have greater than zero probability that would cause it not to 'rise,' e.g., ones that would stop the earth's revolving or change the orientation of its axis or destroy the sun.
post #35 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riboge View Post
That is so ridiculously not analogous to what we have been speaking of that you, if you were capable of it, should be ashamed of yourself. In the unlikely case it needs to be explained to you, you have tried out the sunrise 1000's of times before and have that knowledge to call on in predicting what will happen tomorrow. You have never tried out Codename Turquoise before, so have nothing to base any knowing on.

However, inductive proofs, e.g., of the certainty of tomorrow's sunrise because it has always risen, have been known for literally ages to be imperfect logically. So indeed the next sunrise can only be said to be extremely likely even though its appearance has a perfect record so far. You can imagine events that have greater than zero probability that would cause it not to 'rise,' e.g., ones that would stop the earth's revolving or change the orientation of its axis or destroy the sun.
You do not need to actually do/directly witness something to prove it.

Have we ever seen the earth directly move around the sun? No, we haven't. But we have proved it does using other methods.

The simple fact that you would believe something that has no supporting evidence goes to show just how well your reasoning skills work, or don't.
post #36 of 63
My opinion is that this "tweak" is extremely unlikely to be anything but completely useless, and I don't feel that I have to try it to form an opinion any more than I feel that I should try wearing green socks in an attempt to improve my system. It simply makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And I believe that any adult with half a brain and a high school education should realize that. But of course, that's just my opinion.

BUT, even if this were a useful tweak (extremely unlikely), one should avoid giving any money to Machina Dynamica because of the other acts of fraud and chicanery that they have perpetrated. In the extremely unlikely event that they manage to come up with an actually useful product, I feel they nevertheless should be punished for all eternity for the "Clever Little Clock" and the "Brilliant Pebbles", etc. etc...
post #37 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnGnome View Post
You do not need to actually do/directly witness something to prove it.

Have we ever seen the earth directly move around the sun? No, we haven't. But we have proved it does using other methods.

The simple fact that you would believe something that has no supporting evidence goes to show just how well your reasoning skills work, or don't.
No supporting evidence?!! I'd think you were kidding if I hadn't already seen that you argue for it's own sake and in blind support of a doctrinaire point of view. Of course we observe the earth go around the sun, if we know how to look and interpret what we see. Take eclipses, for example. More relevant for the early proof of it were astronomic observations of the earth's and sun's position and distance from other bodies at different times, from which the orbit of the earth could be calculated, which in turn led to predictions of other observations that when found correct added further proof.

Suffice it to say that I do not think you are in a position to evaluate my reasoning skills or understanding of matters like proof, scientific method, epistomology(theory of knowledge),etc.
post #38 of 63
i don't consider Machina Dynamica to be a fraud at all!

on the contrary, i think it's an exceedingly effective, ongoing prank.
post #39 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riboge View Post
In the unlikely case it needs to be explained to you, you have tried out the sunrise 1000's of times before and have that knowledge to call on in predicting what will happen tomorrow. You have never tried out Codename Turquoise before, so have nothing to base any knowing on.
I haven't actually seen the sun rise in several years, and I know BS when I see it.

See ya
Steve
post #40 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
I haven't actually seen the sun rise in several years, and I know BS when I see it.

See ya
Steve
So you do your posts with your eyes closed?
post #41 of 63
Ad hominem attack. Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you backstage.

NEXT!
Steve
post #42 of 63
I remember reading up about that whole "cover the edges of the CD with black sharpie" as well as "draw a few stripes across the top of the CD." Trouble with sharpie is it's shiny! A surface covered in sharpie ink is glossier than any CD tray I've ever seen. If your CD tray is black, then the best thing I could think of doing is to simply sand it or use a scotch-brite pad to scratch it up until there is no more shine. That way, light doesn't easily reflect off of it back to the CD itself.

Oh, and green absorbs red and vice versa. DVD is a yellow laser, IIRC blue absorbs yellow and vice versa. Yes, black absorbs all light.

And on another note, I remember wondering one time if there was a CD-player program for Windows that would play a CD by data instead of CD-audio, because I didn't have the audio cable hooked up between my CD-ROM and sound card. Then while working in EAC the other day, I noticed when I hit play I could hear it, with no audio cable. Yay! I don't really have a use for that because I rip and use ASIO, but it's useful while working to see if you want to bother ripping a track.
post #43 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logistics View Post
I remember reading up about that whole "cover the edges of the CD with black sharpie" as well as "draw a few stripes across the top of the CD." Trouble with sharpie is it's shiny! A surface covered in sharpie ink is glossier than any CD tray I've ever seen. If your CD tray is black, then the best thing I could think of doing is to simply sand it or use a scotch-brite pad to scratch it up until there is no more shine. That way, light doesn't easily reflect off of it back to the CD itself.

Oh, and green absorbs red and vice versa. DVD is a yellow laser, IIRC blue absorbs yellow and vice versa. Yes, black absorbs all light.

And on another note, I remember wondering one time if there was a CD-player program for Windows that would play a CD by data instead of CD-audio, because I didn't have the audio cable hooked up between my CD-ROM and sound card. Then while working in EAC the other day, I noticed when I hit play I could hear it, with no audio cable. Yay! I don't really have a use for that because I rip and use ASIO, but it's useful while working to see if you want to bother ripping a track.
you don't need audio cable between CDrom and sound card. window has digital audio capability.
post #44 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by chesebert View Post
you don't need audio cable between CDrom and sound card. window has digital audio capability.
Ah, I just tried it in Media Player and it works. It must have been SOME TIME since I've tried playing a CD in windows. I just rip everything.
post #45 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riboge View Post
No supporting evidence?!! I'd think you were kidding if I hadn't already seen that you argue for it's own sake and in blind support of a doctrinaire point of view. Of course we observe the earth go around the sun, if we know how to look and interpret what we see. Take eclipses, for example. More relevant for the early proof of it were astronomic observations of the earth's and sun's position and distance from other bodies at different times, from which the orbit of the earth could be calculated, which in turn led to predictions of other observations that when found correct added further proof.

Suffice it to say that I do not think you are in a position to evaluate my reasoning skills or understanding of matters like proof, scientific method, epistomology(theory of knowledge),etc.
Then maybe you should focus on your reading comprehension.

Because you obviously did not understand my post at all.

WE DO NOT see the earth move around the sun. We observe the effects of the earth moving around the sun, and from that we can extrapolate that it does in fact move around the sun, even without actually seeing it move around the sun.

This is relevant to you saying people have not tried this tweak.

Because we do not actually need to use the product. We can use our reasoning to determine it is BS.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Machina Dynamica "Codename Turquoise"