S888Wheel wrote:
From: chung
Date: 6/28/2004 3:49 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
S888Wheel wrote:
From: chung
Date: 6/27/2004 10:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: wjDDc.118970$HG.109026@attbi_s53
S888Wheel wrote:
From: chung
Date: 6/25/2004 11:32 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
S888Wheel wrote:
From: (Nousaine)
Date: 6/23/2004 4:10 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
Bromo wrote:
On 6/20/04 11:09 PM, in article ,
"Nousaine"
wrote:
It's all hand waving with out any specifics. That would be the case
here
on
both sides.
Let me ask again. If I'm not mistaken you have said that anything
that
can
be
heard can be measured or perhaps that was more like 'if you can't
measure
a
difference than there would be nothing to hear' or something
similar.
I
then
asked exactly what measureable differences would explain amp/cable
sound
.....
and I don't recall a response.
Again what should we be measuring to confirm 'amp/wire' sound that
we
haven't
already done?
It might be that no one knows. If you notice something - even if 10
people
were to denounce you - it does not mean you know the mechanism, nor
are
you
the expert on what measurements to make.
So how do they "design" products then .... by making random choices?
Are
some
people just lucky?
Why would you ask the consumer how the designer opperates? I suggest
you
pose
those questions to actual designers and let them speak for themselves.
Uh, Tom's intent of asking those questions is to make the consumer think
about the questions.
It seems that when many consumers do so the objectivists get very upset
with
any eroneous conclusions they may draw.
Really? It seems like some of the people who came up with the erroneous
conclusions get unhappy when it was pointed out to them why those
conclusions were erroneous. I did not sense any objectivists getting
upset over these erroneous conclusions at all.
The question is better answered by the
designers and the consumer is better served if the answers come form the
designers.
If you would say they "listen" to them for validation
then
I wonder why haven't any of them made listening test validation public?
Ask the people who know, the designers. After all these years of debate
you
should have already considered this.
Again, you missed Tom's intent, which was to make you, the consumer,
think. And question.
I think I get his intent. It looks very much like a shell game played on
consumers who are not technically qualified to discuss such issues.
Wait a minute. Tom was asking some very general questions on the design
process. I would think that someone not being very technical can still
give an educated guess.
What is the point of guessing? I think such guesses are nothing more than
shark
food.
Or start thinking about an answer.
Why? Some of us would really prefer to get at the best sound we can get
without
becoming EEs.
In that case, you probably don't want to know the answer anyway.
If the answers are not simple and easy for the layman to get then I am not that
interestred.
So why
are you even interested in Tom's question?
Because it looked to me like bait for a shell game.
In case you have forgotten, Tom's question was how did the designers
design those products, if, as Mr Bromo suggested, no one knows how to
make measurements that show those products work.
If that was the question then it was based on a false premise. Bromo never
claimed "no one knows how to make measurements that shows those products work."
Please read with more care. Here is what Tom asked:
"Again what should we be measuring to confirm 'amp/wire' sound that we
haven't already done?"
To which, Mr Bromo replied:
"It might be that no one knows. "
The question posted by Tom was how did the designers design those
products *if, as Mr. Bromo suggested,* no one knows how to make
measurements that show those products work.
Where is the false premise? Do you see a difference between "claimed"
(your word) and "suggested"?
Seems like a legitimate
and fair question to ask on this forum.
Perhaps it does until one realizes it may be premised on a flase assumption.But
then you are speaking for Tom here. I thought that wasn't even allowed. Oh
well.
Why? You spoke for Mr. Bromo, no?
And it can be considered a good
rhetorical question, too.
Personally I think good rhetorical question is an oxymoron.
That does not seem to stop you from asking them...