1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

ADEL Technology - Discussion Thread - Update: March 27, 2016: Please Read 2nd Post of the Thread

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by eaglewings, Mar 7, 2016.
First
 
Back
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Next
 
Last
  1. Ruben123
    Sorry to ask, it may seem lazy, but how many questions are answered and if so, what? 2 hours is way too long to watch back for me lol Why dont Steve and Stephen not join head fi? Much easier with the questions.
     
  2. Jtyoung
    nice podcast last night cheers for organising that! Stephen mentioned a new - due to be announced next week - adel hearing protector with a mention of 40db attenuation? Any info on that? Would it be like the 64audio spl ear plugs but using the adel module somehow?  cheers!
     
  3. Canyon Runner
    I am on Head-Fi...

    And watching the cast isn't worth your time? Really? We literally took the time to go down most of your list of questions. 
     
    canali likes this.
  4. Ruben123

    Er, but you are...? Not the guy from the video, right?
     
  5. Canyon Runner
    I'm Steve, this & my Head-Fi name gets mentioned a handful of times during the spreecast. Plus it's pretty well known on this and the 64 thread.
     
  6. Ruben123

    I mustve been messing things up. Thought that Steve and Stephen were the same guy. I wonder why the guy behind ADEL and who's in the video itself isnt joining. He can directly answer our questions, no need for casts and answering questions directed by a person.
     
  7. eldss
    He specifically said during the speedcast that forums are not his thing, but he  gave out his cellphone, skype and email so that people can reach out to him directly. You should try that if you have specific questions, but the speedcast was pretty good I thought. hard to understand some of the questions, because of the echo, but when they answered them, with lots of detail, you understood what the question was. 
     
    Koolpep and Canyon Runner like this.
  8. maniac2003
    +1 @eldss
     
    I really liked the Spreecast (I joined Anonymously), I've watched it till the end (1AM here meanwhile) but it was worth it.
     
    Canyon Runner likes this.
  9. Canyon Runner
    I apologize if I came off a bit short with you earlier, but we literally used Paul's and YOUR list of questions to guide the discussion. So for you to just sit there and say watching us address the very things you wanted, isn't worth your time to watch...it's a bit insulting.
     
  10. Ruben123

    Ah, I didn't know that. Hadn't heard much about my questions anymore so didn't know they were included. Excuse me then
     
  11. Brooko Contributor
    I tried to get through most of them Ruben - and Stephen did a pretty nice job with some of the demos. Again though - he's invited anyone who wants a one-on-one more in-depth explanation to contact him directly.
     
    I think i might have missed the one on bone conduction - but Stephen covered that within other questions as well.
     
    Koolpep likes this.
  12. Ruben123
    Thanks. I'm at 45 min now.
     
  13. Canyon Runner
    We're all good man. I know you're working your way through the cast now, via your later post, apologizes for some of the echo-y sections toward the beginning. It gets better when Stephen jumps on my computer.
     
  14. BiggerHead
    The problem is this product makes not just product claims, but underlying scientific claims. If a prophylactic  cure for cancer came out, I'm not going to watch a two hour video about it to see if I might be convinced to take the pills.  I'm going to wait for a proper article reviewed by doctors. THEN presumably a news source will pick it up and do a two hour video and then maybe I would watch that.  Not every tech company will openly publish all their tricks.  That's fine.  But it doesn't mean skeptics should be expected to watch two hour videos or they're just unreasonable and insulting (I knew that exchange was coming).  If you really want to convince people, clean up those proceedings drafts and posters, write them properly, and submit them for publication in regular edition of a high impact journal, with clear conclusions relating directly to the product claims.  If not, it's just marketing claims and peoples' experiences, which is all most products are, and so that's fine, but that's what it is.  With some products the product benefits are more obvious and those  experiences are more clear cut and rely on previously well known science or effects, but that's not the case here.
     
     
    I would like to strongly encourage you to consider writing more and video less though.  There's a reason books are better educational tools than TV, and they are also more considerate of your audience's time. People can skim writing.  Well written writing is easy to skim because conclusions are highlighted up front, at the end, and by section, and details are expanded within compartmentalized sections.  A transcript is harder to skim, but still far easier than video. It's up to you though.  I'm not the one with a claims to prove.
     
    angelsblood likes this.
  15. castleofargh Contributor
    I've removed flash from my computer for some times now, so I'll need to remember to look at the video when I'm somewhere else(the hard part being "remember"^_^).
     
First
 
Back
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Next
 
Last

Share This Page