[SilentFrequency]

SR claims to do their own measurements during product development, but those measurements are "proprietary." Just one empty claim after another.

se

I guess "proprietary" = trade secrets but in this case it's easy to draw our own conclusions from that, and I agree totally that SR's claims from that point seem empty if not evasive.

I think burden of proof surely should lie with the manufacturer and not with members here.

And that is such a shame I guess?

 

[pataburd]

Or does the burden of proof lie with the folks challenging SR's claim (that is already "out there")?

 

[Mel Famie]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

 

[SilentFrequency]

Or does the burden of proof lie with the folks challenging SR's claim (that is already "out there")?

Please click on Mel Famie's above post link.

It answers your proposition way more better than I ever could.

 

[bigshot]

  Sure. Go ahead and explain.

 
The HOT contains nothing in the signal path that could possibly alter the sound. It is just two plugs wired directly together with nothing in-between them.
 
How did I do?

 

[SilentFrequency]

The HOT contains nothing in the signal path that could possibly alter the sound. It is just two plugs wired directly together with nothing in-between them.

How did I do?

Pretty HOT?

 

[mikeaj]

I mean, seriously, if you designed and oversaw manufacturing of a great new product (much less one never been conceived before) and saw skeptics maligning it, wouldn't you explain how it works and part of the process? I mean, you would have to keep certain details under wraps, but resorting to threats, empty claims lacking any meaningful technical detail and motivation, and PMs doesn't seem like the natural response.

 

[SilentFrequency]

I mean, seriously, if you designed and oversaw manufacturing of a great new product (much less one never been conceived before) and saw skeptics maligning it, wouldn't you explain how it works and part of the process? I mean, you would have to keep certain details under wraps, but resorting to threats, empty claims lacking any meaningful technical detail and motivation, and PMs doesn't seem like the natural response.

Maybe this is a "emperors new cloths" type of HOT product?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes

 

[smial1966]

The proof is clearly discernible by listening to this snake oil quackery, as it muddies the signal path and is deleterious to sound quality. But then stuffing a small cylinder full of sand, passing a wire thru it and then expecting this contraption to improve your headphone listening experience beggars belief, doesn't it?!?

Or does the burden of proof lie with the folks challenging SR's claim (that is already "out there")?

 

[SilentFrequency]

Guys I was thinking of going into business selling power cables.  What do you think I could get for this?





FEATURES:
- Male and female ends connected by 3 wires!
- ...Unlikely to be carcinogenic!

(pictured with optional isolation base)

I think I've found a buyer for your device!

http://larryfire.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/d46c5c80cff5f51134d50506_533x711.jpg

(lol!)



Edit: and he wants two!

only joking!

 

[castleofargh]

 

Guys I was thinking of going into business selling power cables.  What do you think I could get for this?





FEATURES:
- Male and female ends connected by 3 wires!
- ...Unlikely to be carcinogenic!

(pictured with optional isolation base)

I think I've found a buyer for your device!

http://larryfire.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/d46c5c80cff5f51134d50506_533x711.jpg

(lol!)

Edit: and he wants two!

only joking!

I thought the "only joking" warning was insulting my intelligence, then I remembered in what topic we were.
so you probably did well.

 

[Dark_wizzie]

  Or does the burden of proof lie with the folks challenging SR's claim (that is already "out there")?

I'm going to try to put this in uh... less offensive terms so this post doesn't get deleted.
Religious people generally have no idea how the burden of proof works, and you're demonstrating this right now.
 
And in many ways, this is an audiophile religion.

 

[Brooko]

  Religious people generally have no idea how the burden of proof works

 
I cannot even start to tell you how bigoted and intolerant this statement is. What the heck does a person's faith have to do with it.

 

[gikigill]

   
I cannot even start to tell you how bigoted and intolerant this statement is. What the heck does a person's faith have to do with it.

 
Nothing wrong there.
 
He isn't pointing to anyone in particular, just showing the burden of proof lies with those making the claims not the ones challenging it.
 
" Hey Brooko, I just got a billion bucks, too bad I cant show it to you or spend it on you or provide other evidence but trust me I totally have the billion dollars.
 
Same applies to religions and any other sort of claims be they scientific or audio related as is the case of the HOT.

 

[Brooko]

No - he deliberately and intentionally singled out one particular group.  He didn't have to mention it - and it is a poor analogy anyway.  I am deeply religious (Christian) but that has nothing to do with my understanding of the burden of proof.
 
And there is a big difference between lying about something material, and about a person's faith.
 
I won't go into it further - as I know it's banned on the forum.  But I still say making the statement like he did is both bigoted and intolerant.