New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rainbow Foil, Initial impressions - Page 4  

post #46 of 466
Quote:
Originally posted by rodbac
However, if you think your music improves with the addition of a sticker to the label, it's neither "placebo effect" nor psychosomatic. There is no change in the music/sound, so there is no measurable 'effect' to give a name to (actually, there probably is, but it will mean "purely in your head").
With all due respects, have you attempted this tweak and taken measurements? If not, how can you say that there are no measureable effects? All that's happening here is that you believe that there will be no measureable effects, which is even less real data than PinkFloyd's subjective listening test.

Quote:
Originally posted by ooheadsoo
That's how these people get away with charging all this money. Is it because the customers are blinded by their own ignorance or are gullible? Well, maybe gullible, but there's no doubt in my mind that they are hearing an improvement when they say they are.
You're leaving out one major possibility. The people really are getting their money's worth out of the product. I won't go into testing issues due to forum rules (which others should also consider).

Mind you, I have no idea whether this works or is nonsense. However, I see little point to speculation in the absence of real data. The only data here is Pink Floyd's trial. So, the preponderance of actual data says that it may be worth a try.
post #47 of 466
Hirsch: absolutely. If you're hearing the improvements, you absolutely are getting your money's worth. No argument there. Most importantly, it makes you happy. Meanwhile, people like me who have shallow pockets will toe the line bordering skepticism for our own mental state of health
post #48 of 466
Quote:
Mind you, I have no idea whether this works or is nonsense. However, I see little point to speculation in the absence of real data. The only data here is Pink Floyd's trial. So, the preponderance of actual data says that it may be worth a try.
hirsch, there is no data. nothing measurable anyway. even the manufacturer says so on his website! this is absolutely a 100% try-it-yourself kind of deal.

as i see there's no way to measure whether Pink actually hears a difference, which would be the only thing that i could think of to verify this products validity, based on what they are claiming... well, there really is no objective debate over this product.
post #49 of 466
Quote:
With all due respects, have you attempted this tweak and taken measurements? If not, how can you say that there are no measureable effects? All that's happening here is that you believe that there will be no measureable effects, which is even less real data than PinkFloyd's subjective listening test.
I told you- I'll retract any negative statements I made if Pinky will do a proper test.

Quote:
The only data here is Pink Floyd's trial. So, the preponderance of actual data says that it may be worth a try.
With all due respect to Pink Floyd, his data is worthless until it's corroborated with definitive data. If I claim the sun's going to come up in the west tomorrow morning, my theory doesn't get equal weight with "rises in the east" until it's proven otherwise- we have very good reason to believe it will continue to rise in the east, so claims to the contrary will have to be backed up by a lot more than "I believe it to be so" to be considered seriously.

And again, if it's working as he says it is, it will be obvious in the test. Hell, I'll conduct it- we can have a few beers for the occasion (my treat).

Quote:
as i see there's no way to measure whether Pink actually hears a difference
Oh, but there is. We'll go buy two copies of Wish You Were Here. We'll put the rainbow on one, we'll sit Pinky in a chair facing the other way, have him put on my A900s (or HD600s, his choice), and I'll randomly play them for him in some acceptable way (1 minute bites x 100 or something?).

If he can "perceive" a difference with the tape vs without, it will be glaringly obvious in the results.
post #50 of 466
The perception is inherently tied to the knowing that the tape is on which cd. We've already agreed that the sound doesn't actually change so a blind test is unnecessary.

How about this analogy. Watch a sappy love movie by yourself. Enjoy yourself?

Watch it with your girlfriend holding your hand. Different perception?

I don't think many people would argue that the movie changed.
post #51 of 466
Quote:
I don't think many people would argue that the movie changed.
The movie didn't change- the time you spent watching the movie was more enjoyable, which is commonly what people are meaning when they say "it was better when I went and saw it with my gf". They don't claim the story was told better or the "DOLBY DIGITAL SURROUND" was more detailed.

Further, he (no offense, Pinky) didn't claim he had a better time listening to the music- he says it sounded better to him, which I'm pointing out is a very easy thing to corroborate and silence his critics.

Now, I'm all for Pinky being happy listening to his music, but if it takes a piece of tape on his CDs to help that, maybe we (or he) need to be looking for what's keeping him from enjoying the music fully in the first place.
post #52 of 466
wow....first there were the one-way cables...then the suspending your cables off the ground...and of course that device that literally shaved off some plastic off your cds....

...now rainbow foil...hahaha this world is better than the matrix..hahahahah
post #53 of 466
No, but they did claim that it was more enjoyable with their gf (gf = tape, if you hadn't noticed) and I can bet you that they noticed a bunch more details in the movie than they didn't before. Those details were there just the same in both cases.

"which is commonly what people are meaning when they say "it was better when I went and saw it with my gf" Now replace gf with tape. The key stimulus was the gf, not the things that I didn't even mention in my analogy.

I know you understand the analogy but are choosing to deliberately misunderstand.

You are willing to admit that the mere presence of a gf can change one's perception of a movie, but if I had said I had a better time listening to Diana Krall with my girlfriend, would you be as willing?


"Now, I'm all for Pinky being happy listening to his music, but if it takes a piece of tape on his CDs to help that, maybe we (or he) need to be looking for what's keeping him from enjoying the music fully in the first place."

Now, that's a perfectly valid point. However, if we can find that $1 tape, I think it'd be an easier solutions
post #54 of 466
Quote:
I know you understand the analogy but are choosing to deliberately misunderstand.
I'm doing nothing of the sort, ooh. I'm actually striving pretty hard to play fair here, when this subject has absolutely nothing to stand on to be honest with you.

You're trying to claim something to the effect of "If he says it sounded better with the tape, then the tape made it sound better."

I'm reminding you that the tape did nothing (or, since I'm playing fair, that I believe the tape did nothing and am willing to prove it).

In logic, there is an axiom that states something to the effect of "that which can explain anything, explains nothing". It means that if I claim there is a dragon in my garage and you don't see him when I take you to look, I can't explain that away by saying "you can't see him if he doesn't want you to see him". Since I can apply that to anything at all ("you can't detect his fiery breath with infrared if he doesn't want you to be able to", etc), then it is not a valid explanation. Period.

This applies to this situation because saying "if Pinky thought it sounded better, then it did" could be applied to ANY claim anyone wanted to make about a product/treatment/whathaveyou.

If someone wants to claim they simply had a groovier time listening to music after <insert product/treatment here>, then we can all roll our eyes and accept it. If, however, they want to say they thought the music sounded better because of <insert product/treatment here>, they should be willing to back it up because music sounding better is detectable and testable, and I'm not talking about "what really constitutes 'better'", I'm talking about them being able to tell a tester which copy of the cd they're listening to.

[edit]

removed- edit2 explains it more clearly.

[edit2]

Quote:
No, but they did claim that it was more enjoyable with their gf (gf = tape, if you hadn't noticed) and I can bet you that they noticed a bunch more details in the movie than they didn't before. Those details were there just the same in both cases.
The point is that there were other reasons the details were noticed. If his girlfriend's presence made him, say, more attentive (so he noticed more about the movie), then it was the attentiveness, not the girlfriend, that made the difference. The correct claim, then, would be that attentiveness makes a movie more enjoyable, NOT that girlfriends make movies more enjoyable.

And, again, if all we're talking about is that he "was in a better place during the movie", or something equally useless to the rest of us, then we just roll our eyes and say good for him.
post #55 of 466
Let's take it another step further. What caused the extra attentiveness?

You know, I think you're right. I think I'm right too. The difference is that I place more value in the end result, where you put more value in the means to achieve the result.

"And, again, if all we're talking about is that he "was in a better place during the movie", or something equally useless to the rest of us, then we just roll our eyes and say good for him."

Yes! But I try to stay away from rolling my eyes
post #56 of 466
Quote:
You know, I think you're right. I think I'm right too. The difference is that I place more value in the end result, where you put more value in the means to achieve the result.
Fair enough.
post #57 of 466

Not that it matters now, but...

I really should have been a bit more careful about posting on Ars about this. Linking directly to this product would have been a much better idea rather than linking to this forum. I personally think anyone who believes this stuff works is being stupid (sorry), but not all audiophiles in general. Regardless, I didn't have anything nice to say, so I should have kept my mouth shut. Sorry.
post #58 of 466
Yeah, maybe the title was too general and harsh, but a little critical thought is never, ever a bad thing.
post #59 of 466

Re: Not that it matters now, but...

Quote:
Originally posted by radrd
I really should have been a bit more careful about posting on Ars about this.
Well it could have been worse, most of the posts over there were funny anyways so it made for some entertainment.
post #60 of 466
I've tried the rainbow foil stuff, and posted my results on Audioasylum:

Quote:
I recently received a free sample of Peter Belt's rainbow foil in the mail today, courtesy of an old Greg Weaver column in Soundstage (http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize041999.htm).
I tested the foil by applying it to the Chesky Ultimate Demonstration Disc, listening, removing the foil, listening again, then repeating the process over and over.

Simple conclusion: either the foil doesn't work at all, or the magnitude of the differences it creates are SO tiny that they're not worth mentioning. At some points, I did *initially* feel the foil was making a difference -- for example, on Spanish Harlem, I felt Rebecca's voice get warmer and more expansive -- but with closer listening, the effect entirely disappeared.

I also tried another Peter Belt recommended tweak, which can be found at http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/whatamess.html , :

"Any home with a deep freezer within the premises is having a significant beneficial symmetrical pattern imposed throughout the premises. To prove this it is possible to destroy the symmetrical pattern within the deep freezer. All that is necessary is to place an untreated battery or magnet, or a hologram (such as those found on virtually every plastic charge card) inside the deep freeze compartment. Simply place any one of these objects within a plastic bag, place within the freezer compartment and any musical sound within the listening room will be profoundly adversely affected. Removing the object from the deep freeze compartment will immediately restore the previous high standard."

I put the battery in the freezer, listened quickly, took it out, listened again, and repeated the process many times. Result: no changes in the sound quality.
Take it for what it's worth...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
This thread is locked