Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
-Question for John Atkinson-
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"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? You tell me, Mr. Welch. Why does your magazine give positive reviews to such do-nothing frauds? When was that, Mr. Welch? Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such a major issue? ;-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message oups.com 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. Here's a little tip about reading English, John. Mr Welch qualified his statement with the word "such". That means that finding or not finding a review on a specific product is far from definitive. Odd that I'm being forced to give you practical lessons in reading rhetoric, John. Mini-strokes? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:41:38 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message roups.com 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. Here's a little tip about reading English, John. Mr Welch qualified his statement with the word "such". That means that finding or not finding a review on a specific product is far from definitive. Odd that I'm being forced to give you practical lessons in reading rhetoric, John. Mini-strokes? Well, you certainly give lessons in debating trade tactics. "Mr. Welch" has learned well. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for something it
did not do and get away with it, just by using the 'such as' clause? I think not: The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how much 'slippery' wording is used. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"BD" wrote in message
ups.com So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for something it did not do and get away with it, just by using the 'such as' clause? I think not: The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how much 'slippery' wording is used. Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or what have you: http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html "Mpingo Discs are small, ebony discs that measure about 1 (5/8" in diameter and about 1/2" thick. They're meant to be placed face- (logo-) side down on turn-tables and all front-end electronics; eg, CD transports, DACs, preamps. Like all Shun Mook products, the Discs are directional. They cost $50 each, so you can buy a few to experiment with in your system and then buy a few more, which I know you'll do after hearing them. The Mpingo I use on the large, flat VTA adjuster knob on the Forsell Air Force One Mk.II gives an excellent effect; I've placed three of them in a triangle around the turntable's platter, tangent to the direction of platter spin. "On some turntables, it works better to orient the Mpingos in toward the spindle. We entertained a friend from another audio magazine the other day, and as I lifted the four Mpingos from the Forsell and then replaced them, he was in awe: With the Discs in place, the sound was richer and more extended, and all aspects of the soundstage reproduction were enhanced---you don't need gold-plated ears to hear the difference. "I've got a Mpingo on the top of my CAT preamp; I move it to the top of the Jadis JP 80 MC's chassis near the line-stage tubes when that sexy French preamp is in the system. (It becomes a strange-looking beast with its Mpingo and Ensemble Tubesox in place.) There are three Mpingos on top of the Timbre Technology digital processor---its case is rigid and damped by design, and it takes all three to make the difference here, although usually one is sufficient on electronics. I've also got a Mpingo slotted in between the twin pair of speaker binding posts on each Jadis JA 200, and move them to the same or similar positions when switching amps. *Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and stranger and stranger... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
BD said to DebatingTradeBorg: So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for something it did not do and get away with it, just by using the 'such as' clause? I think not: The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how much 'slippery' wording is used. The "debating trade" is not recommended for sane persons. Please be cautious. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield Optimizer" with
the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer". 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. 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? 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? Is that clear enough, Mr. Atkinson? 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. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
John Atkinson wrote:
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? If I were easily misled, Mr. Atkinson, I would be a loyal Stereophile reader. Do you see Randi everywhere, Mr. Atkinson? If I were a huckster and conman like yourself, an intelligent, persistent, hard-nosed sceptic like Randi would get under my skin, too. 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? Which one? The Blue Bottle or the Green Bottle? 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. You sound like an astrologist, Mr. Atkinson. Do you also believe in the Akashic record? Tarot cards? Tea leaves? 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? A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... 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. Truth at last! But that doesn't mean it can't have an effect, of course. So why not provide some objective proof. Maybe because you can't? 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? If they were, they would have provided proof. Since they didn't, you can assume they are just writing words for money. And those words are usually what is asked for, or what is expected by the publisher. MrT. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message oups.com 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, it just goes to show that your idea of a skeptic corresponds to most people's idea of a born sucker. The mind boggles at the idea of Stereophile publishing a review of Shatki devices written by say, David Clark or for that part, Richard Clark. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.audio.tech John Atkinson wrote:
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? Was the 'avowed skeptic' skeptical enough to actually subject the 'device' to a controlled comparison? Could it be possible that neither Scull nor Willis actually evaluated the device in a manner that would actually identify whether the *cause* of the 'positive audible effect' was subjective or objective? -- -S |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
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 Can I assume that these Shakti devices were purchased by Scull and Willis, and they are currently installed in their systems? Norm Strong |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Given the enthusiastic reactions in 1994 of both your then-resident
subjectivest Jonathan Scull (in vol.19 no.2) and your avowed staff sceptic Barry Willis (in vol.19 no.4) to the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" (aka, Shakti Stone), I'm sure you must have felt the need to experience these marvels for yourself in your personal music system. How could you not? How many Shakti Stones did (do) you use? How did you place them? Any insider tips on which components they are most effective on? Any other info you would care to pass along? TIA! |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... 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. It appears you are parsing words. Mr. Welch asked 2 separate questions. How could the Shakti device do what it claimed, and why would your magazie review things that can't possibly do what is claimed of them? If your mag ever did a review of the Shakti device he mentioned, then you could answer as to why. If you didn't review it then why review other devices that are snake oil? 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. See above and stop the stupid dancing. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
John Atkinson: audio ignoramus or sleazebag? | Audio Opinions | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
RCA out and Speaker Question in 2004 Ranger Edge Question | Car Audio |