[skwoodwiva]

The original post in this thread is great. Anyone reading at this point in the comments would do best by just going back to post one in the thread and reading it again.

The sound cops are on the pa(troll)!
Lets let the Op respond
Is that not reasonable?
I PMed him yet I fear he has abandoned the forum.

 

[skwoodwiva]

Indeed

So one of this forums GREATEST members & a Fabulous audiophile has fled!
Wow!

 

[colonelkernel8]

The sound cops are on the pa(troll)!
Lets let the Op respond
Is that not reasonable?
I PMed him yet I fear he has abandoned the forum.

It's not reasonable. Your rants and raves are not worthy of real consideration. I don't even know why I'm responding to you. But I guess if it raises awareness of the OP's brilliant post, job well done.

 

[skwoodwiva]

Hmm jan 28, maybe I was rash about this, I hope I am wrong...

 

[bigshot]

Don't feed the troll.

 

[castleofargh]

Indeed

So one of this forums GREATEST members & a Fabulous audiophile has fled!
Wow!

you praise him, but maybe you could also take his methodology for yourself.
OP is a simple guy, he doesn't try to pass as some expert, he doesn't claim too much, he just wondered about something and looked for many reasonable tests on the subject to form an opinion and hopefully get some facts out of it all. of course it's a very good method and he's certainly praiseworthy in a domain where others are so keen on jumping to conclusion no matter how little they actually know. we certainly agree that he's a cool dude. for doing all that work and research before making claims, and also for sharing it all with us instead of posting something like "audiophiles are wrong most of the time, lol". and leaving it at that. the general idea is fairly similar but the way to reach the conclusions is not nearly as clear nor trustworthy.

so far you've done the mostly the opposite of his first post. you've posted a great deal of empty claims and offered very little pieces of evidence to substantiate anything you said. and we know you didn't research some of the subjects too much, because some of your claims are just plain wrong and no measurement or blind testing is ever going to support them.
my point is. if you like the guy, please pretty please, be more like @Prog Rock Man when you post. provide evidence, explain experiences, rely on controlled test. and stop making empty claim about everything. the claim should come at the very end when all the knowledge has been gathered, when all the controlled experiences have been analyzed, then if we feel like we have enough elements, we draw some conclusion and perhaps claim something. if you don't care much about proving you claims, you should make them outside of this section. in the cable section, blind testing is a forbidden subject. nobody is going to annoy you with silly stuff like facts and your outstanding lack of evidence about the audibility of something when you post in the cable section. you say what you like, someone will agree, someone will disagree, and that's the end of it.
in here if you're making a claim, you better have solid evidence to back it up. nobody asks for you to make so many claims, we 'd rather you didn't. claims are something serious. but if you want to post them anyway, at least in the spirit of science and objective reality, prepare a shitload of evidence to try and convince the other members.
in short, be more like @Prog Rock Man. fewer claims, more data.

 

[skwoodwiva]

you praise him, but maybe you could also take his methodology for yourself.
OP is a simple guy, he doesn't try to pass as some expert, he doesn't claim too much, he just wondered about something and looked for many reasonable tests on the subject to form an opinion and hopefully get some facts out of it all. of course it's a very good method and he's certainly praiseworthy in a domain where others are so keen on jumping to conclusion no matter how little they actually know. we certainly agree that he's a cool dude. for doing all that work and research before making claims, and also for sharing it all with us instead of posting something like "audiophiles are wrong most of the time, lol". and leaving it at that. the general idea is fairly similar but the way to reach the conclusions is not nearly as clear nor trustworthy.

so far you've done the mostly the opposite of his first post. you've posted a great deal of empty claims and offered very little pieces of evidence to substantiate anything you said. and we know you didn't research some of the subjects too much, because some of your claims are just plain wrong and no measurement or blind testing is ever going to support them.
my point is. if you like the guy, please pretty please, be more like @Prog Rock Man when you post. provide evidence, explain experiences, rely on controlled test. and stop making empty claim about everything. the claim should come at the very end when all the knowledge has been gathered, when all the controlled experiences have been analyzed, then if we feel like we have enough elements, we draw some conclusion and perhaps claim something. if you don't care much about proving you claims, you should make them outside of this section. in the cable section, blind testing is a forbidden subject. nobody is going to annoy you with silly stuff like facts and your outstanding lack of evidence about the audibility of something when you post in the cable section. you say what you like, someone will agree, someone will disagree, and that's the end of it.
in here if you're making a claim, you better have solid evidence to back it up. nobody asks for you to make so many claims, we 'd rather you didn't. claims are something serious. but if you want to post them anyway, at least in the spirit of science and objective reality, prepare a ****load of evidence to try and convince the other members.
in short, be more like @Prog Rock Man. fewer claims, more data.

What do you think Amirm's test thread is all about?
Truly the thing you ask for.
Gulp for BS's comments, ahh yes a new nickname

 

[castleofargh]

What do you think Amirm's test thread is all about?
Truly the thing you ask for.
Gulp for BS's comments, ahh yes a new nickname

it's certainly very good that you're curious enough to test things yourself. if only for that, you're already better than many audiophiles I know(seriously). but let's not kid ourselves, that alone doesn't legitimize all the empty claims you've already made. and you've made a bunch.
you came here, we don't know you, we have no reason to think you're better or worst than the next guy. yet in a very short period of time you've had several people getting "annoyed" by your posts, bigshot ignoring you which isn't a bad idea when dialogue fails, a few others reporting you to moderation for being a troll. there is like a pattern to all this and maybe, just maybe, it's a tiny bit your fault.

if I take the topic about headphone burn in as an example, you came claiming stuff, didn't bother justifying anything, and then went on to support and like any comment suggesting burn in mattered, no matter how relevant the post was. does that look to you like somebody concerned with facts? it would be hypocritical of me to say you're the only one behaving like that, but just because you're not alone doesn't mean you're doing a great job in the name of truth.
you introduced yourself to the burn in topic with this:

Absolutely, leave em on 24/7, 2 weeks, very loud.

and this:

Is
Breaking-in headphones needed.
Yes 100 hrs min.

so if you feel like what you do in general is in the same vein as what @Prog Rock Man does, take a deep long look at your posts and think again. because clearly you're doing it wrong.

 

[bigshot]

I'm standing on the dock wishing you well and waving as you take the cruise to crazy town!

 

[skwoodwiva]

I'm standing on the dock wishing you well and waving as you take the cruise to crazy town!

Words you do so well Sir, poetic reply.

 

[pinnahertz]

There is an electrical reality known as dielectric absorption, where say, the poorest insulation-vinyl will accept electrons from the conductor. Then when the signal "pressure" drops it gives up these same elections.
" Smearing" is the result. That is why teflon is sought after. Your conscience mind may not even pick up what is going on but the simulation of a live musical experience is tarnished.

There is also a difference between an "electrical reality" and a mechanism that has an audible impact on an electrical audio system. DA isn't one of the latter, but clearly someone doesn't understand what dielectric absorption is!

Jon Risch on DA

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/how-can-i-make-my-own-acoustic-materials other stuff

https://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/zip-cord-vs-cross-connected-coax-article.485/ ok, some

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/~apm3/diyaudio/Connections.html bingo...

https://www.venhaus1.com/Audiolinks.html the mother load
Yet many dead links.

Actually, the motherload of dead links and inapplicable ones. Nothing there has anything to do with DA.

While I know JR tests, being the most famous audiophile/ engineer. Most deduction comes from smarts, we all can extrapolate real effects, microwave technology to audio because they are related.

I'd never heard of him, so I read his web site, and now I know why. Audiophile, yes. Engineer, not so much. Deduction, seriously flawed, and the resulting interpolation is not valid. His "tests" are rudimentary measurements of electrical parameters (big deal, anyone can do that), his audibility tests are complete nonsense, fully sighted and completely biased. This guy is NOT a scientist at all. I'd link to his page, but it doesn't deserve the traffic.

 

[colonelkernel8]

There is also a difference between an "electrical reality" and a mechanism that has an audible impact on an electrical audio system. DA isn't one of the latter, but clearly someone doesn't understand what dielectric absorption is!
Actually, the motherload of dead links and inapplicable ones. Nothing there has anything to do with DA.

I'd never heard of him, so I read his web site, and now I know why. Audiophile, yes. Engineer, not so much. Deduction, seriously flawed, and the resulting interpolation is not valid. His "tests" are rudimentary measurements of electrical parameters (big deal, anyone can do that), his audibility tests are complete nonsense, fully sighted and completely biased. This guy is NOT a scientist at all. I'd link to his page, but it doesn't deserve the traffic.

QED.

 

[Kerry56]

I think you guys need to recruit a new member. He's fighting the good fight over at Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8d2h8g/with_sennheisers_hd_600_i_cant_tell_the/

 

[castleofargh]

I think you guys need to recruit a new member. He's fighting the good fight over at Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8d2h8g/with_sennheisers_hd_600_i_cant_tell_the/

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/wit...book-air-and-a-magni-3-in-an-abx-test.877611/ ^_^

 

[bigshot]

I'm sure the response is "either your equipment is lousy or your ears are". That's what people say when they just don't want to know.