AudioBanter.com - View Single Post - -Question for John Atkinson-

wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?

Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)

It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.

Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".

Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.

And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?

Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?

I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?

Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile