[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milosz /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
I really wish the Amazing Randi would offer his $1 million prize again re: hearing the difference in speaker or RCA cables- I would love to see Michael Fremer try to prove he can hear the difference between different copper wires.

 
He'd have had a chance if Randi hadn't disingenuously pulled the rug out from under him.
 
I lost all respect for Randi after that.
 
se
 
 

 

[williaty]

Quote:

 
He'd have had a chance if Randi hadn't disingenuously pulled the rug out from under him.
 
I lost all respect for Randi after that.
 
se
 
 

Then you got suckered into believing someone's spin.
 
Read coverage of the whole debacle by someone with no skin in the game (meaning not JREF, not Pear Audio, not Fremer, not anyone audiophile affiliated). Gizmodo's coverage stands out in my mind a pretty balanced. http://gizmodo.com/315250/pear-cable-chickens-out-of-1000000-challenge-we-search-for-answers All the parties involved displayed poor interpersonal skills, I'll grant that.
 
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by williaty /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Then you got suckered into believing someone's spin.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
 
I was there when it all went down. I didn't get anyone's "spin" second hand.
 
se
 
 

 

[williaty]

Quote:

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
 
I was there when it all went down. I didn't get anyone's "spin" second hand.
 
se
 
 

Uh huh. So what part of it counted as pulling the rug? Demanding a test that followed established rules of good experimental procedure? The cable vendor backing out? Seriously, if you have here-to-fore unrevealed knowledge about what happened, let's hear it.
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Uh huh. So what part of it counted as pulling the rug? Demanding a test that followed established rules of good experimental procedure? The cable vendor backing out? Seriously, if you have here-to-fore unrevealed knowledge about what happened, let's hear it.
 

Well it's clear now who got suckered into believing someone's spin.
 
First, it wasn't Pear's challenge. It was Fremer's challenge.
 
Second, the Pear cables weren't the only cables on the table.
 
On the table were Pear's cables, Fremer's own Tara Labs cables and some cables from Transparent.
 
When Pear announced that they had since decided not to provide any of their cables for the challenge, Randi used that as an opportunity to make a number of disparaging remarks about Fremer and Pear and declared the challenge over, EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE STILL TWO CABLES ON THE TABLE.
 
Randi was not interested in anything more than trying to smear Fremer and Pear, to get all his little sycophants grunting and drubbing on the table.
 
The man is a weasel.
 
And I say that out of sadness as I used to have a lot of respect for him.
 
se
 
 

 

[williaty]

It'd be hard for me to be sucked into JREF's spin on this since I've never read a single thing anyone associated with the organization has said about this challenge :lol: I'm familiar with JREF's efforts at fighting other forms of woo. 100% of my contact with this issue has been from reading accounts published by journalists who had interviewed the participants.
 
1) His decision not to use Fremer's reference cables was sound. It would have been easy to have modified those cables in an audible way. In fact, his decision not to provide the cables at all was the bad one. JREF absolutely should have bought the cables without revealing to the vendor what they were for. I have no knowledge of what was wrong with the Transparent cables, do you? If not, why do you think it was more likely the negotiations broke down over cable selection rather than some other detail?
 
2) Yes, I'm aware it was Fremer and JREF involved in the challenge and that Pear was just supposed to provide the cables. Pear's pulling out is what seemed to trigger the collapse of the whole thing.
 
3) JREF is definitely interested in trashing woo, wherever it may be found. This does tend to make them and their fans a bit less than tactful :lol: Seriously, though, given the crazy crap these guys are trying to disprove and the nutjobs they encounter in doing so, how much faith would you have in the average person? Not all ideas are worth respecting. Sadly, when you deal with it on a daily basis, it's hard to not let that bleed over into the idea that not all people are worth respecting.
 
4) It's not up to JREF to find a way that the extraordinary claims can be proven or dis-proven. It's up the challenger to find a scientifically valid method for the experiment. JREF serves as a moderator and a financial incentive to try, nothing more.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

It'd be hard for me to be sucked into JREF's spin on this since I've never read a single thing anyone associated with the organization has said about this challenge :lol: I'm familiar with JREF's efforts at fighting other forms of woo. 100% of my contact with this issue has been from reading accounts published by journalists who had interviewed the participants.
 
1) His decision not to use Fremer's reference cables was sound. It would have been easy to have modified those cables in an audible way. In fact, his decision not to provide the cables at all was the bad one. JREF absolutely should have bought the cables without revealing to the vendor what they were for. I have no knowledge of what was wrong with the Transparent cables, do you? If not, why do you think it was more likely the negotiations broke down over cable selection rather than some other detail?
 
2) Yes, I'm aware it was Fremer and JREF involved in the challenge and that Pear was just supposed to provide the cables. Pear's pulling out is what seemed to trigger the collapse of the whole thing.
 
3) JREF is definitely interested in trashing woo, wherever it may be found. This does tend to make them and their fans a bit less than tactful :lol: Seriously, though, given the crazy crap these guys are trying to disprove and the nutjobs they encounter in doing so, how much faith would you have in the average person? Not all ideas are worth respecting. Sadly, when you deal with it on a daily basis, it's hard to not let that bleed over into the idea that not all people are worth respecting.
 
4) It's not up to JREF to find a way that the extraordinary claims can be proven or dis-proven. It's up the challenger to find a scientifically valid method for the experiment. JREF serves as a moderator and a financial incentive to try, nothing more.

I find absolutely nothing in the above which refutes Randi's disingenuously pulling the rug out from under Fremer while just as disingenuously smearing him when he did.
 
se
 
 
 

 

[williaty]

 
Quote:

I find absolutely nothing in the above which refutes Randi's disingenuously pulling the rug out from under Fremer while just as disingenuously smearing him when he did.
 
se
 
 
 

I agree about the smearing, actually, but from all sides, not just JREF's.
 
You've yet to substantiate your rug-pulling claim in any way. The guys couldn't agree on an experimental protocol so no test was conducted. Where's the rug pulling?
 
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

You've yet to substantiate your rug-pulling claim in any way. The guys couldn't agree on an experimental protocol so no test was conducted. Where's the rug pulling?
 

Where on earth are you getting your information from?
 
At the time Randi pulled the rug and declared the challenge over, they hadn't even got around to discussing experimental protocol! Hell, they hadn't even decided on which cables to use.
 
And my rug-pulling claim is substantiated by the fact that there were still TWO CABLES on the table at the time he did it.
 
Randi made it appear as if ONLY the Pear cables were to be considered. Which simply wasn't true.
 
Here is the original official challenge put forth by "JREF" on the JREF forum:
 
We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.
 
So right there that's TWO cables on the table.
 
In an EMail discussion with Randi, Fremer offered up a third suggestion, that of using his own Tara Labs cables, namely because he already had them, but also because he was familiar with them and would rather go into the challenge using a cable he was familiar with rather than a cable he'd never had any experience with before.
 
Randi replied saying he would actually prefer that option, but that he'd first have to consult with his advisors. To wit:
 
I think I'd go with option 3, for simplicity, but I'll have to consult with my advisors, first.
 
And THAT'S where things stood when Randi pulled the rug out. And at THAT time, the Transparent cable had NOT been excluded NOR had Randi consulted with his advisors with regard to Fremer's Tara Labs cables.
 
Yes, his advisors eventually pooh-poohed the idea of Fremer using his own cables, saying he might alter them in some way that would allow him to pick them out, but that came AFTER THE FACT.
 
So as I've said, at the time Randi declared the challenge over after Pear backed out of their offer to provide cables, there were still TWO CABLES ON THE TABLE.
 
se
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[williaty]

No, there weren't. Pear had pulled theirs and using Fremen's reference cables was experimentally unsound. That leaves only the Transparent cables on the table. Again, unless you saw every communication between both parties, you don't know that there wasn't some other issue that cause things to break down.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

No, there weren't. Pear had pulled theirs and using Fremen's reference cables was experimentally unsound. That leaves only the Transparent cables on the table. Again, unless you saw every communication between both parties, you don't know that there wasn't some other issue that cause things to break down.

No, you're wrong. There were two cables still on the table. Again, Randi had NOT taken Fremer's Tara Labs cables off the table because again, when he pulled the plug, he HADN'T yet talked to his advisors. His after the fact weasel excuse was that he had to go to the hospital on Friday, as if he couldn't have waited until the next week to talk to them.
 
Quote:

That leaves only the Transparent cables on the table.

 
No, it doesn't. But even if the Transparents were the only cables on the table, THERE WAS STILL ANOTHER CABLE ON THE TABLE.
 
So, since you don't dispute that the Transparents were on the table at the time, then you yourself substantiate my claim that Randi disingenuously pulled the rug out from under Fremer.
 
Thank you.
 
Quote:

Again, unless you saw every communication between both parties, you don't know that there wasn't some other issue that cause things to break down.

 
I did. And there wasn't. When Randi pulled the rug out, the only thing that was going on was Fremer waiting for Randi to talk to his advisors regarding his Tara Labs cables.
 
Randi's pulling the rug out from under Fremer was based SOLELY on Pear withdrawing their offer to provide cables, with, by your own admission, at least ONE OTHER cable on the table.
 
There's simply no denying it. The man is a disingenuous weasel.
 
se
 
 

 

[williaty]

OK, so basically, we're supposed to take your word for it that you saw every piece of communication when you've obviously sided with one party and yet all the people who covered the story in the press didn't get any of the same statements out of any of the participants? Are you going to try to sell me a large bridge from New York next? I'd certainly believe you might have seen all the communication that one party chose to show you. That's a fair step away from knowing what both sides were thinking and understanding why what happened happened.
 
Here's the thing, I simply don't believe you that you have the complete and full knowledge of the situation that you claim.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

OK, so basically, we're supposed to take your word for it that you saw every piece of communication when you've obviously sided with one party and yet all the people who covered the story in the press didn't get any of the same statements out of any of the participants? Are you going to try to sell me a large bridge from New York next?

 
Ok, so you don't believe me.
 
Previously you challenged my rug-pulling claim by claiming "The guys couldn't agree on an experimental protocol so no test was conducted."
 
Please cite any direct statement by Randi or any quote of Randi's reported in the press that substantiates your claim that they couldn't agree on an experimental protocol.
 
se
 
 
 
 

 

[williaty]

So you don't think the subject of the test is a part of the protocol? That's the primary point of contention both sides have mentioned. Yes, the cable is a part of the protocol. Are there additional things said behind the scenes that might also have been issues? Sure, I don't have any way of knowing that and you don't either.
 
 
Anyway, have a good night, it's time to go listen to some music, so I won't be rapid-firing responses back anymore.

 

[Josey]

Is there any double-blind, or even single-blind test showing that people can reliably distinguish high-end cables from run-of-the-mill good cables?