Synergistic Research HOT device
Dec 22, 2014 at 8:57 PM Post #136 of 168
[EDIT]    I feel like an idiot for wasting my time with this.

 
Mel, let me just personally thank you for putting in the effort in your testing.  You may feel it was a waste of time but I think most of us here would feel that this is valuable to our education, and really appreciate your efforts.
 
These kinds of products really offend me actually...us "stereo aficionados" are a curious bunch and I think that our curiosity and desire to always be making things "better" is often exploited by all kinds of manufacturers.  I am a firm believer that if you can't measure a difference (with the advanced tools available today) then it is very likely that there is none, period.  I think you've done a great service to us all in bringing the real details to light, and gosh-darn if it hasn't been an interesting thread!
 
Hi-Five
 
Dec 22, 2014 at 11:43 PM Post #137 of 168
Of those who have tried the HOT, and thought it had an effect, do you have any qualms or comments about what has been investigated and measured so far?
 
If you think you did hear a positive effect, which cannot be accounted for by the product's design, materials, or electrical characteristics, are you still confident that you heard what you thought?
 
If so, how do you think you overcame the power of suggestion, expectation bias, cognitive dissonance, and the variabilities of sighted, uncontrolled listening sessions?
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 3:03 AM Post #138 of 168
  Of those who have tried the HOT, and thought it had an effect, do you have any qualms or comments about what has been investigated and measured so far?
 
If you think you did hear a positive effect, which cannot be accounted for by the product's design, materials, or electrical characteristics, are you still confident that you heard what you thought?
 
If so, how do you think you overcame the power of suggestion, expectation bias, cognitive dissonance, and the variabilities of sighted, uncontrolled listening sessions?

 
Were measurements posted? If they were I must have missed it. However I did read Mel saying he didn't hear anything and that's fine as :-
 
- I have to cater for the possibility of expectation bias there too (i.e. "If I'm a skeptic and I expect to hear nothing, I will hear nothing")
- Mel hadn't shared anything on what equipment he/she used for
   * listening (As mentioned by @Hudsonpost #85)
   * measuring
- I don't know his/her skills in measuring
 
Also, to be honest I don't know Mel. He/she's been in the forums for about 5 weeks with only 18 posts of which has been entirely the HOT topics only. Personally, his/her credibility has yet to be proven to me. As an alternative, is Tyll doing any measurements?
 
Bottom line, I'm not here to convince anyone. I managed to borrow a HOT and listen, then to share what I've found. It's up to readers to take it for that they will. I haven't asked @Currawong but knowing him, I'd guess he'd be the same.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 3:36 AM Post #139 of 168
   
Were measurements posted? If they were I must have missed it. However I did read Mel saying he didn't hear anything and that's fine as :-
 
- I have to cater for the possibility of expectation bias there too (i.e. "If I'm a skeptic and I expect to hear nothing, I will hear nothing")
- Mel hadn't shared anything on what equipment he/she used for
   * listening
   * measuring
- I don't know his/her skills in measuring
 
Also, to be honest I don't know Mel. He/she's been in the forums for about 5 weeks with only 18 posts of which has been entirely the HOT topics only. Personally, his/her credibility has yet to be proven to me. As an alternative, is Tyll doing any measurements?
 
Bottom line, I'm not here to convince anyone. I managed to borrow a HOT and listen, then to share what I've found. It's up to readers to take it for that they will. I haven't asked @Currawong but knowing him, I'd guess he'd be the same.

 
See Mels post no. 85 explaining his/her position with regard to posting measurement results.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 3:59 AM Post #140 of 168
   
See Mels post no. 85 explaining his/her position with regard to posting measurement results.

 
Yes I saw that. I was aware of his position which is his prerogative. But thanks for redirecting as I missed his listening headphone, HD800, as such updated my post
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 10:38 AM Post #141 of 168
   
Were measurements posted? If they were I must have missed it. However I did read Mel saying he didn't hear anything and that's fine as :-
 
- I have to cater for the possibility of expectation bias there too (i.e. "If I'm a skeptic and I expect to hear nothing, I will hear nothing")
- Mel hadn't shared anything on what equipment he/she used for
   * listening (As mentioned by @Hudsonpost #85)
   * measuring
- I don't know his/her skills in measuring
 
Also, to be honest I don't know Mel. He/she's been in the forums for about 5 weeks with only 18 posts of which has been entirely the HOT topics only. Personally, his/her credibility has yet to be proven to me. As an alternative, is Tyll doing any measurements?
 
Bottom line, I'm not here to convince anyone. I managed to borrow a HOT and listen, then to share what I've found. It's up to readers to take it for that they will. I haven't asked @Currawong but knowing him, I'd guess he'd be the same.

Mel already gave some pretty good hints of the equipment he used for testing:  
"Just to confirm that the crushed stuff in the silver paint is quartz, I ran some infrared spectra and compared it to an authentic sample of crushed quartz (Gelest SIS6964.0). The instrument was a Nicolet S10 FT-IR with a Diamond Cell ATR accessory. Both the SR "crystals" and the authentic quartz show the same characteristic absorbances for quartz (main peak of 1080 cm-1, medium peak at 1160 cm-1, and a doublet at 795/775 cm -1). Because of the silver paint, the SR shows a free carrier tilt to the baseline, but the spectra are otherwise identical. 
These measurements confirm the earlier EDX results- it's silver paint with some crushed quartz in it. "  
And: "I think the SEM/EDX and FT-IR results pretty much nailed things down from the materials end. From the electrical side, we have the usual array of spectrum and network analyzers, as well as audio-specific test gear."
 
You stating that his "credibility has yet to be proven to you" is a crude little attempt to poison the well.  Do you consider that SR's credibility has been proven to you, on the other hand?  Their "explanations" of their products are clearly doublespeak and obfuscation.  There is no information in their information, and really no indication that they understand any electrical engineering.


 


 
Dec 23, 2014 at 12:14 PM Post #142 of 168
To AnakChan and Currawong.
Was it not the case that the HOT device received is damaged? To be fair to you both,  you outlined the nature of the damage in your impressions- "channel cutout" and that the "cap fell out" etc. However, personally I feel you should have gone further from those statements.
 
Considering the less than perfect state of the product, I feel it is going too far by producing statements such as "But the bottom line for me is that the device does not do nothing. This unit clearly does, and positively in my experience."
 
Given the state of the product, an acknowledgement of the possible unreliability of its impressions would have been more appropriate. I feel it's only fair given the scrutiny that has recently been asked of Mel Famie.
 
@AnakChan - "I'm not here to convince anyone"
That may well be the case, but imo, when you post your impressions and engage on a thread using a product loaned out to you (albeit via @Currawong) by the manufacturer in question, the impression can appear somewhat contrary to your intentions. In other words, just saying that you're not here to convince does not negate the impact your opinions will have on readers. That goes for everyone, not just you. As a mod, an argument can be made that your words may carry more weight than others.
 
 
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 6:40 PM Post #143 of 168
Yeah Mel's tests are pretty inconclusive because he didn't use a soundstage-o-meter...
wink_face.gif

 
I think it's the mod's job to try and keep things two sided.  Would like to see SR's retort with their own measurements.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 7:19 PM Post #144 of 168
Quote:
 
  I will be posting detailed results elsewhere, since the inevitable conclusions are, given my limited experience here, likely to be censored and thus my posts will not be representative of my opinion (I have already had some of my posts "helpfully" edited for me without my permission). I will offer a brief summary:
 
Using a simulated headphone load to replicate the HD800 impedance curve, and a loopback as control, there is no change in frequency response, distortion, noise, or crosstalk. DC resistance, inductance, and capacitance are exactly what one would expect for a plug and a jack wired together. The internal coating (which should be noted is painted over metal!) is a mixture of silver paint and crushed quartz and has no measurable function.
 
In listening, I could hear absolutely no difference with the "device" in or out of the circuit. The earlier report of severe degradation may well be due to a defective solder joint or other connection- there is nothing in measurements or listening to corroborate it.
 
If someone wants to waste time doing an ABX test, feel free, but be aware that it's easy to cheat the foobar plug-in. A better DBT method here would be sequentially recording the test material with the "device" randomly in or out of the circuit (coin flip randomization) and then having the listener attempt to sort the tracks into two piles. But in my opinion, the time could be better spent counting how many cars go past in an hour with license plates containing the number seven.

 
I missed this post. I agree with Anakchan about expectation bias: I've been caught both ways personally, expecting and not expecting things and being wrong. Anything I post, I have no way to prove I'm hearing unless I construct a box allowing me to test it. I figured I could construct multiple boxes, each wired differently (A/B, B/A, A/A, B/B for example) but externally identical then mix them up in a bag, have someone else label them 1 to 4 or more and pick one out. Then, after writing up my experiences with each one open them up and see what the result was. Right now I don't feel the effort it worth it, because I don't feel the device is worth it.
 
But here's the thing, taken from the above quote:
 
 I will be posting detailed results elsewhere, since the inevitable conclusions are, given my limited experience here, likely to be censored and thus my posts will not be representative of my opinion

 
I don't get how a genuine opinion is "Likely to be censored". If it were, these threads wouldn't be here.  What I have a problem with now is that because Anakchan and I have posted our genuine opinions and experiences, we got a flood of accusations that we are "on the take", that he is "convinced" that we are "corrupt" and defending a product from a protective sponsor, even though, as everyone should know by now, neither of us are employed by Head-Fi, nor receive any financial benefits from being here, so whatever Ted or anyone else does regarding sponsorship neither affects nor matters to us. What seems apparent to me is that people here want to lynch both Synergistic Research, Ted, and trash the HOT and everything he makes to the point that people are snide, rude and abusive towards anyone who posts anything other than a completely negative comment about the company, Ted and his products. 
 
I don't recall personal attacks, abuse and rudeness to have anything to do with science.
 
@SunTanScanMan If, because we are Head-Fi staff, we can't post our honest opinions about a product as a member, then that is crazy. What you seem to be implying is the same thing as other people have: That it is bad or dishonest that we say anything other than negative comments about the device, rather than our own opinions. 
 
Back to topic, when I first had the HOT here, any difference I felt I heard was so slight I don't believe I'd pass a blind test. I'm sensible enough to know that! It'd be interesting if Tyll was to test a pair of headphones with and without it plugged in and see if something like the distortion goes down at all. Regardless, since people are worried that I'm defending it (which I'm not) it isn't a product I'd at all recommend at the moment, for a number of reasons.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM Post #145 of 168
@Currawong - My post does is not about whether head-fi staff could/should not post honest opinions about the product. Indeed I agree with you that that would be crazy.
 
1) If the product shows signs of fault/imperfection such as cutouts etc that you and Anakchan described, I think it is fair to acknowledge a certain degree of caution to the reliability of the product's impression. But by all means state your impressions whether they be negative or positive.
 
2) My second point quoting Anakchan focuses on the appearance rather than the intentions of the poster. Namely, the focus of my argument is on his statement - "I'm not here to convince anyone". Again I am not arguing about whether the impressions should always be positive or negative.
 
Yes perhaps my points are pedantic, but they are also specific. Perhaps I could have made that clearer in hindsight.
 
Having said this, AnakChan PMd me regarding my last post and I replied with my thoughts on moderators. He can share the message with you. As it happens, I don't have such low regard towards moderator staff as you are implying.
 
 
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 10:47 PM Post #146 of 168
   
What seems apparent to me is that people here want to lynch both Synergistic Research, Ted, and trash the HOT and everything he makes to the point that people are snide, rude and abusive towards anyone who posts anything other than a completely negative comment about the company, Ted and his products. 
 

Whoa, your first part about "people here want to lynch" the company and Ted is an over the top comment - that's more extreme than anything said by previous posters.
The part about "people are snide, rude, and abusive" is not true and at best an overstatement and overgeneralization of what some people have said here. 
 
Dec 24, 2014 at 1:00 AM Post #147 of 168
 
 
I don't recall personal attacks, abuse and rudeness to have anything to do with science.
 

 
Sorry to break it to you, but scientists can be a rather bickering, snidey and jealous buch.

Hurtful personal attacks should of course be avoided, but the mockery and ridicule that has emerged during this discussion is no more than what snake-oil merchants and HF staff should be expected to manage. 
 
Dec 24, 2014 at 1:19 AM Post #148 of 168
 
 
 
I don't recall personal attacks, abuse and rudeness to have anything to do with science.
 

 
Sorry to break it to you, but scientists can be a rather bickering, snidey and jealous buch.

Hurtful personal attacks should of course be avoided, but the mockery and ridicule that has emerged during this discussion is no more than what snake-oil merchants and HF staff should be expected to manage. 

 
Limpidglitch: Your post is a very good example of why we are incapable of having a sane discussion.
 
@Billheiser The post I quoted is a perfect example of the problem. I'm out.
 
Dec 24, 2014 at 2:26 AM Post #150 of 168
 
   
 
 
@Billheiser The post I quoted is a perfect example of the problem. I'm out.

? Lynch was your word. "What seems apparent to me is that people here want to lynch both Synergistic Research, Ted, and..."  Ain't nobody here was talking like that.

 
 snake-oil merchants

 
Everyone else can read both threads and see for themselves, minus a libellous statement that was removed.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top