[radrd]

Well, Greenhorn deserves a bit of credit here. He picked off your thread for what it was quite some time ago. Nice catch Greenhorn .

I'm impressed that you stuck with it this long, considering how few people fell for your joke and believed that this foil makes a difference. Unless the joke was that you were trying to convince people that you are an idiot. In that case, bravo! You succeeded admirably!

So what is your real take on this crap, Pinkie?

 

[marios_mar]

ok thanks for saving me the time to try out the samples that came.

is the whole belt company a joke? is it intented as a joke or what?

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by radrd Unless the joke was that you were trying to convince people that you are an idiot. In that case, bravo! You succeeded admirably!

That comment is expected and inkeeping with your opinions on audiophiles in genereal radrd. May I remind you of a few of your comments which will show others that you are just here to ridicule and have nothing constructive to say other than to call people idiots and stupid:

Quote " [size=x-large]Audiophiles are stupid![/size] " This was the title of the thread you started at the ARS forum where you stated "Yeah, I know, I'm ashamed to say that I own power cables and interconnects. I don't believe they work anymore though. It's all a bunch of [size=x-large]crap[/size]" http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/...m=806002673631

You say on ARS "I'm not calling *him* [size=x-large]stupid[/size], I'm calling audiophiles [size=x-large]stupid[/size]. The very fact that [size=x-large]crap[/size] like this exists and people buy it is [size=x-large]stupid[/size]. He he he... I wonder if I'm going to get banned from Head-Fi?"

You then say on Head-fi after your post on ARS was discovered "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 [size=x-large]stupid[/size] (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." Yes you should have kept your mouth shut because your comments made you look like a nincompoop

You then say "I've blind tested interconnects and found no difference, so I'm not about to bother with this [size=x-large]stupid[/size] foil."

You joke about the rainbow foil as being "A cheap alternative to viagra maybe?"

Then you suggest "I vote neither Rodbac nor PinkFloyd posts in this thread anymore. Then maybe it will either die or become worth reading again." hmmm.

You then use the idiot word again but this time you call yourself an idiot

"You've both made your opinions clear ALREADY. You believe this [size=x-large]crap[/size] works and he doesn't. Until someone else comes along with some sort of new insight into the matter, you are essentially ruining your own thread. As far as whether that essay is worth reading, I personally doubt that anyone who doesn't believe this [size=x-large]crap[/size] works is going to bother reading it (me...). However, I'll concede that it's probably interesting and maybe even informative. If I were you I would encourage discussions on that, possibly in a new thread about the psychology of listening or whatever. However, the rest of your posting back and forth with Rodbac about whether the foil works is pure [size=x-large]idiocy[/size]. Let it go already. Now someone is going to point out that my posting is [size=x-large]idiocy[/size], and I'll spot you a quick touche to avoid saying it later."

You then make a quite valid contribution and come very close to what this thread is all about:

"Now, he may have believed that you would have to be [size=x-large]crazy[/size] to believe this stuff works, and therefore this thread is a huge game you are playing to show just how [size=x-large]dumb[/size] some audiophiles can be. If that's the case, then I applaud you, as this thread is a shining example that I'm sure I will link to again at some point in the future when I need to prove just how sheeplike audiophiles can become."

You respond to the scientific studies on the fruit and say "That's a joke, right? Are you [size=x-large]nuts[/size]?"

Then. the idiot reference again: "You are blindfolded to the fact that these people are working very hard to convince you that something is true when any rational human being can see that this is snake oil. And embracing snake oil because you like placebos makes you an [size=x-large]idiot[/size]."

And again: "Unless the joke was that you were trying to convince people that you are an [size=x-large]idiot[/size]. In that case, bravo! You succeeded admirably!"


That was your contribution to this thread radrd and all you did was call people "idiots", products "crap" and Audiophiles "stupid"

I think it's quite obvious who has made a total ARS hole out of themselves here. By the way, have you ever considered using a Thesaurus? There are more elaborate ways of calling people an "idiot"

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marios_mar ok thanks for saving me the time to try out the samples that came. is the whole belt company a joke? is it intented as a joke or what?

Marios,

I'm not saying that at all. I've only tried the Rainbow foil and, to me, I thought the music sounded better and, as there is no scientific evidence, I put that down to placebo effect.

My comments in the above thread were basically saying "ok, I agree, all PWB stuff is crap and this thread is a big joke" I don't mean that but what's the point in attempting to discuss this any further with all these thread crappers calling people idiots and lunatics etc.? May as well just say "yeh you are all correct.... everything is crap" I've just had enough of these small minded ignoramuses and don't wish to attempt to discuss anything with them waiting in the wings with their put downs and smart arse comments.

You've got your sample so try it but if you find it improves the sound then don't post your findings here of you'll be branded a fruitcake or an "idiot"

 

[radrd]

Thanks Pinkie. For a while there, I thought you'd started ignoring my posts altogether. It's nice to know my view has not gone totally unappreciated. Who knows, maybe if you work hard enough you can get me banned?

Quote:

By the way, have you ever considered using a Thesaurus? There are more elaborate ways of calling people an "idiot"

Indeed there are, but why dress it up? Plus, it wouldn't be worth the extra effort.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by radrd Thanks Pinkie. For a while there, I thought you'd started ignoring my posts altogether. It's nice to know my view has not gone totally unappreciated. Who knows, maybe if you work hard enough you can get me banned?

Don't be daft

Quote:

Originally Posted by radrd Indeed there are, but why dress it up? Plus, it wouldn't be worth the extra effort.

You mean it was an "effort" to think up words like "crap" "idiot" etc. ?

 

[tortie]

Play nice guys.

It was bad form in radrd's part in posting that thread is arstech, but he has already apologized for his mistake.

About this rainbow foil business; I hope everybody here understands that everyone experiences things differently. Pinky can hear a difference with the foil & I can't, but that does not give me the the right to bash him or even argue with him just because I did not hear what he heard. This applies even more so to those who have not tried the foil for themselves.

There are a lot of threads here that start with somebody sharing his or her experience with a component or tweak and another poster will add "You are dead wrong, it should sound like this..." or "I hear differently, so there is something wrong with you or your hearing..." Nobody should tell another person what he can or should hear.

 

[rgraham]

I have followed this thread for a while, but have not known if I could add anything, but here goes.

I have used Rainbow Foil for as long as it has been available, and Peter Belt products since 1988! I swear by them, but they do not make a wax cylinder sound like DVD-Audio.

The subjective nature of music is a problem, and those that feel we can objectify the issue would probably use a computer to decide whether Tolstoy or George Eliot are the greater novelist, or Ibsen or Chekhov the greater playwright.

I personally am surprised at how many feel current science has reached the peak of knowledge, and how could a headphone engineer who has strayed from the path, discover anything? As a medical practioner, I am aware that Digitalis existed inside the foxglove, and was used, well before 'scientists' produced Digoxin and its derivatives. Nature provided what the scientist could discover, and use. How many here accuse the pharmaceutical industry of exploitation?

Testing Rainbow Foil is always problematic, and usually arouses the intense responses seen here. There is inevitably a pressure to report no effect - is that 'correct' though?

I personally find it offensive that people feel comfortable to obtain samples from Mr Belt - at his expense - only then to accuse him of trying to exploit them! Presumably they either feel their grip on their sanity is so slight that they can easily be fooled, or that Peter Belt has discovered a fantastic means of generating money through marketing ineffective products - an extraordinarily cynical notion. But then this is the audio industry.

It would be nice for once to see a real, balanced discussion of the matter, where a true scientific mind was at work, but instead, as I have witnessed over the past 16 years, infantile male rivalry and hysteria dominate.

I ask one question only - is this a forum where true responses on anything can be documented? Pink Floyd's recent postings answer that. So where does that leave you?

Richard Graham

 

[Steve999]

Hey!!! Welcome to head-fi!!!

I enjoyed your post!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgraham I have followed this thread for a while, but have not known if I could add anything, but here goes.

 

[classe]

I alsoo asked for a sample of foil.
This was last year. And yes the cd sounds better with foil.
You will be hearing more details and you will get a little bit more warmth.
My father thought alsoo that it was nonsens and more.
But out of 3 cd's; everytime he picked out the Belt version.
Then i tried more stuff from Peter like Cream Electret etc. and again you will be hearing more details, more space between instruments.
So i'm very happy with Peter his products.
Greetings Bernhard.
And for everyone who is thinking: this is a joke: It is NOT.

 

[eric343]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgraham I personally am surprised at how many feel current science has reached the peak of knowledge, and how could a headphone engineer who has strayed from the path, discover anything? As a medical practioner, I am aware that Digitalis existed inside the foxglove, and was used, well before 'scientists' produced Digoxin and its derivatives. Nature provided what the scientist could discover, and use. How many here accuse the pharmaceutical industry of exploitation? Testing Rainbow Foil is always problematic, and usually arouses the intense responses seen here. There is inevitably a pressure to report no effect - is that 'correct' though? I personally find it offensive that people feel comfortable to obtain samples from Mr Belt - at his expense - only then to accuse him of trying to exploit them! Presumably they either feel their grip on their sanity is so slight that they can easily be fooled, or that Peter Belt has discovered a fantastic means of generating money through marketing ineffective products - an extraordinarily cynical notion. But then this is the audio industry. I ask one question only - is this a forum where true responses on anything can be documented? Pink Floyd's recent postings answer that. So where does that leave you?

To answer a few of your points, nobody here is saying that current science has reached the "peak of knowledge" or anything like that. Rather, we're saying that the PWB foil is simply ineffective (and as such, overpriced). Unlike the pharmaceutical industry, whose remedies have a known and reasonably quantifiable effect, the rainbow foil seems to have no effect other than as a placebo. As such, it would be fair to accuse Peter Belt of exploiting the placebo effect to make money. (To be fair, he's not the only one to have discovered "a fantastic means of generating money through marketing ineffective products" -- look at the amber bead tweaks page.)

Also, when you say there is pressure to report "no effect," I would argue that that is more than countered by the pressure to report *some* effect. Since, as you said, audio is a user-dependent experience, a user of the foil that reports hearing a difference with the foil might be percieved as having better hearing than a user that reports no difference, thereby increasing their "status" (if only in their own mind) in the public forum. An excellent example of this phenomena is presented in "The Emperor's New Clothes." In essence, not hearing a difference in the world of audio might be percieved as tantamount to admitting that one is incapable of hearing a difference-- and therefore, it takes guts and brute honesty to declare that there is no difference.

Lastly, Peter Belt sent those samples out free with no attached conditions. Therefore, he cannot expect us to report the truth as we hear it, even if the truth could be detrimental to his business. A similar situation faces audio reviewers who recieve free gear from audio manufacturers, in that a bad review of gear could cut off the reviewer's supply of gear from that manufacturer or even end his career (if no other manufacturer wants to risk a bad review). As a result, you'll likely never see a bad review in an audio magazine.

 

[eric343]

Quote:

Originally Posted by classe My father thought alsoo that it was nonsens and more. But out of 3 cd's; everytime he picked out the Belt version.

May I ask for more details regarding the procedure you used? The way you word it implies that you performed a true double-blind test, however you don't give enough details to verify that this is indeed the case. The credence that a statement gains by declaring a blinded test is worthless if the test was not actually blinded.

 

[eric343]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PinkFloyd but if you find it improves the sound then don't post your findings here of you'll be branded a fruitcake or an "idiot"

Well, from radrd anyway

My beef is with those that claim it HAS to be something other than the placebo effect, without backing that statement up. As I've said before, it's not necessarily worthless if it relies on the placebo effect -- as we can see, even the placebo effect can make your system sound better.

 

[rgraham]

I value your faith in the pharmaceutical industry, and hope the measurable benefits of so many of the drugs that have law suits against them is evidence that published measurable effects are a guarantee. See Thomas Quastoff.

Could you demonstrate evidence within this thread of a pressure to hear *some* effect? Your posting, amongst others, denigrates the experience of those that do; if I support Pink Floyd's venture, it is out of respect for a courageous exposition. Do you really believe anyone is pressured to hear an effect? If so, who has such influence, and why is Peter Belt not making millions? I spend a minor fortune going to various opera houses, including Salzburg etc, and yet find the results often lacking. Still, when it works it is magic, truly. What do you make of the sums spent, and the varied response? I have paid more in Salzburg than anywhere else, yet some 'cheaper' performances have been superior - to me. Why? Is it a reverse placebo effect?

My understanding of the placebo effect is that a pharmacologically inert substance effects the same result as a pharmacoactive substance, which is treating an ill. I struggle to see what my placebo response is treating. I would much rather the benefit on a cheap Sony system, and would be happy to be deluded. As it is, I find the effects of Belt products on Merdian 800, 861, 8ks staggering (at least forgive my anglophile tendencies). If you could enhance this placebo effect, I would be financially grateful to you; trust me, if someone had what Belt has to offer, at a lower price, I would consider it.

I still hold to the point that many obtain samples from Belt and function in quite a paranoid manner. Why would there be so much ridicule and sarcasm on reporting results? And if a protectionist attitude must pervade, can you ensure that all subscribers eat healthily, avoid products of the alcohol and tobacco industries, exercise moderately, and subscribe to the 'nanny state' that prevents all challenges and protects us all from thinking for ourselves.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgraham I have followed this thread for a while, but have not known if I could add anything, but here goes. I have used Rainbow Foil for as long as it has been available, and Peter Belt products since 1988! I swear by them, but they do not make a wax cylinder sound like DVD-Audio. The subjective nature of music is a problem, and those that feel we can objectify the issue would probably use a computer to decide whether Tolstoy or George Eliot are the greater novelist, or Ibsen or Chekhov the greater playwright. I personally am surprised at how many feel current science has reached the peak of knowledge, and how could a headphone engineer who has strayed from the path, discover anything? As a medical practioner, I am aware that Digitalis existed inside the foxglove, and was used, well before 'scientists' produced Digoxin and its derivatives. Nature provided what the scientist could discover, and use. How many here accuse the pharmaceutical industry of exploitation? Testing Rainbow Foil is always problematic, and usually arouses the intense responses seen here. There is inevitably a pressure to report no effect - is that 'correct' though? I personally find it offensive that people feel comfortable to obtain samples from Mr Belt - at his expense - only then to accuse him of trying to exploit them! Presumably they either feel their grip on their sanity is so slight that they can easily be fooled, or that Peter Belt has discovered a fantastic means of generating money through marketing ineffective products - an extraordinarily cynical notion. But then this is the audio industry. It would be nice for once to see a real, balanced discussion of the matter, where a true scientific mind was at work, but instead, as I have witnessed over the past 16 years, infantile male rivalry and hysteria dominate. I ask one question only - is this a forum where true responses on anything can be documented? Pink Floyd's recent postings answer that. So where does that leave you? Richard Graham

Hi Richard,

Welcome to Head-Fi and that was a superb first post! In answer to your question I doubt there are any forums where true responses can be documented as you will always have people with different views and people who are not interested in the topic only intent on ridiculing and deriding others opinions.

That, sadly, is the way it is at Head-Fi and I feel that people should not comment on equipment / tweaks unless they have experience of the equipment / tweaks but who am I to lay down any common sense guidelines like that?

You are absolutely correct, infantile male rivalry and hysteria do tend to dominate the proceedings and people seem more concerned on "getting the last word in" and scoring points than discuss the topic in question in a rational adult manner.

I was, am, prepared to open my mind to PWB products but certainly not in "open air" on these forums as the pack mentality and naysayers even managed to get me to call Peter Belt a "jester" due to repeated inferences that I was an "idiot" for even considering thinking about rainbow foil, let alone actually listening to my music with a strip of rainbow foil attached to a CD.

The pack of naysayers and know alls always manage to get the upper hand in these threads as it's easy for them to throw their uninformed comments into the arena (usually along the lines of you are an idiot and you're talking crap) which makes it hard for the people who want to discuss a subject in depth and "seriously" In the end, the serious folk who want to discuss are basically forced out of the arena by the idiots who want to spoil the debate or are cajoled into agreeing with them to not be seen as a "lunatic"

If these idiots stayed away from subjects they were not interested in and spent their time pursuing subjects they were interested in then we could debate and analyse products without the intervention of ill informed, self appointed arseholes with no purpose in life other than to badmouth everything around them. We all know these people have low self esteem and the only place a person with low self esteem wants you to be is below them so they'll do their utmost to put you there. (another subject another channel!)

Enough of my ramblings, I'm off to listen to a Rainbow treated CD in "private" and enjoy the music

Out of interest Richard..... are you Dr. Richard Graham who compiles the P.W.B Newsletters? I noticed there was reference to a Dr. Graham at http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ Is that your good self?

If so, I'm sure you will be better served than I to give a bit more insight into Peter Belt's theories.

All the best.

Pinkie.