Before committing to arranging some stuff I needed to *be sure* of all
aspects of this conflict, this animosity, I needed to make sure of who
is who and is that "who" so absolutely wrong as I deem him to be.

As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.

I am talking about me trying the paper pinhole tweak... My kid had
torn off a picture of a giraffe from his animals book. My wife was
telling the kid that "one should not tear books" etc. I said "wait, what
a coincidence, I'll take that." I cut that into a neat rectangle put
an a4 on it with the pinholes, put an aspirin on the center hole... And
I *could not* bring myself to somehow pin that on the exquisite woodwork
of the sonus fabers, or selotape it and *of course not* glue that to
them. So I just put the whole paper bit, "device" as shp puts it, on top
of the odyssey amp. And I started listening......

And listening.....

The music seemed to have slowed down a bit. There was increased clarity
because of that. Details and the whole picture, the whole presentation
was more "natural" is the word that comes to mind, everything became
better embedded with a "self-explained" nature, somehow. It was not like
the initial effect of the shakti's (which have no effect whatsoever on
the odyssey amp combo), nothing in the sounscape was re-arranged but
rather the character of all sounds became "more there" and more natural...

So I now announce a unilateral ceasing of all form hostilities between
my "fella" persona and "soundhaspriority".

I will do my best to not get affected by the most probably continuing
hostility, bad behaviour and bitterness to be dislayed by shp. I will do
my best to refrain from responding to him in the like.

But I *do* apoligize for some of the acusations and name calling I
subjected him to during these past days. As far as I am concerned, they
are water under the bridge.

And I *do* thank him for sharing with us such a "tweak" .. I will not
dive in to my closet-room, scissors in hand though. This much
betterness in sound is more then enough for me, I am not greedy. It was
quite hard to stop listening to music before, to go to work, take care
of the kid, etc, now it seems it might be damn impossible.

Next I will try the tweak in the living room HT system.

As to why that "tweak" works the way it works, frankly I have no idea.
All I know is that I felt extremely stupid and silly when preparing it
and applying it. Perhaps part of the explanation is the humbleness one
really needs to muster up in oneself to actually go ahead and execute
the "tweak".

Right now listening to "Bernstein : Diaspora Soul" .. Like never before.

Fella wrote:

Considering the courage that it takes for an arrogant "RAOer" to
actually admit he's wrong about something, especially about audio,
and considering the fact that you did make an effort to try my tweak
-as instructed-, I am not going to start shoving your words back in
your face here, to make you eat them again. I won't quote the dozens
and dozens of lines of you calling me a "silly whore, etc. etc." for
advocating my tweaks, I won't reprint the 3 million curse words you
hurled at me, or you declaring me "pure evil", for trying to help you
improve your audio system. Instead I accept your truce and say....

"Welcome aboard the quantum revolution!".

If you speak to me respectfully, I will attempt to answer you in kind.

Now be prepared to answer the same ignorant ridicule and mockery that I
received from your peer group every day for nearly 2 months straight.
Here are some of the general ways your ignorant, prejudicial, and
bigoted peers, who don't know what they're talking about, will try
to convince you that you didn't hear what you just heard:


- "You're just "search listening"! The effect will wear off the
moment you stop thinking about it!" (this one sound familiar?)

- "It's a placebo, fool!"

- "You're insane!"

- "Are you gonna use a Contact C instead of an Aspirin, if your
speakers have a cold?! Haw!"

- "If you didn't DBT it, it didn't just happen!"

- "Can anyone say "Expectation effect"?"

- "Instead of a picture of a giraffe, perhaps you should have used a
picture of a horse's ass? LOL!"


.....etc. etc. etc. etcetera, ad nauseum, or until the little kiddies
collapse of mental exhaustion or laughter from their fits of mockery.


Before committing to arranging some stuff I needed to *be sure* of all
aspects of this conflict, this animosity, I needed to make sure of who
is who and is that "who" so absolutely wrong as I deem him to be.

As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


I know. But I did mention as much in my thesis, "Message to Ignorant
Pigs of RAO", didn't I? You know, the "long one" that no one read?


I am talking about me trying the paper pinhole tweak... My kid had
torn off a picture of a giraffe from his animals book. My wife was
telling the kid that "one should not tear books" etc. I said "wait, what
a coincidence, I'll take that." I cut that into a neat rectangle put
an a4 on it with the pinholes, put an aspirin on the center hole... And
I *could not* bring myself to somehow pin that on the exquisite woodwork
of the sonus fabers, or selotape it and *of course not* glue that to
them. So I just put the whole paper bit, "device" as shp puts it, on top
of the odyssey amp.

Yeah, I may have omitted the fact that you don't really need to
sellotape the 5-pinhole paper device to the object. Doing so probably
makes it very slightly worse, because now you're introducing glue and
tape into the mix. Taping it just makes it practical for the long term,
because otherwise it'll get knocked off or misplaced.

I note that you didn't try it on your speakers as I originally
described but on your amplifier. But as I later added, it can have an
effect on many objects, and as many objects that you attach the device
to, will compound the total effect on your system. Because of the
aspirin, it probably works best on wood.

And I started listening......

And listening.....

The music seemed to have slowed down a bit. There was increased clarity
because of that. Details and the whole picture, the whole presentation
was more "natural" is the word that comes to mind, everything became
better embedded with a "self-explained" nature, somehow.

Great, now you've done what I thought you should have done in the
first place. Which is to find out for yourself what effects the tweaks
have, instead of trying to ask me. Because I can't project my
listening experiences on you, not knowing what your listening skills
and thought processes are. And in doing so, I am subverting your
experiences. That said, I recognize and understand a few of the things
you describe; "natural" sound, and sound embedded with a
"self-explained" nature, for example. (Which is why its difficult to
describe this nature to people who haven't heard it).

This is what I tried to get across to you people a long time ago;
alternative audio techniques aren't just about cheap parlour tricks
to improve your system in dribs and drabs, if at all. Not only can
alternative products completely transform your sound, far more than a
mere component upgrade, they achieve characteristics of sound that
conventional audio techniques *can not achieve*. (Conventional audio
applications can only "resemble" these characterstics, and even then,
only with products that achieve high and very high levels of
resolution; read: pricey). IOW, what alternative audio concepts
effortlessly achieve, conventional (Newtonian based) concepts struggle
very hard to do so, because they operate on completely different
scientific principles.

The effect you heard is the same that Sander heard after he tried the
5-pinhole paper tweak, and the same that I did, except we all have
somewhat different ways of describing it, as I mentioned. I call it a
reduction in "hifi hash". Imagine if you could turn a variable switch
that gradually decreases all the "hifi" aspects of a hifi system, and
presents sound in a pure, natural state. That's what always results
from applying advanced alternative audio concepts and products to your
environment or sound system.

It was not like
the initial effect of the shakti's (which have no effect whatsoever on
the odyssey amp combo), nothing in the sounscape was re-arranged but
rather the character of all sounds became "more there" and more natural...

The Shakti stones operate on entirely different principles (attempts to
reduce EMI, not the same adverse energy that the 5-pinhole paper tweak
reduces). If they had the same effect, then I'd be surprised. I also
note that the Shakti stones cost several hundred dollars. My 5-pinhole
paper tweak costs .003 cents. Not that I'm saying "Don't buy the
Shakti's". If you like the effect they produce and can afford them, I
have no problem with that.

So I now announce a unilateral ceasing of all form hostilities between
my "fella" persona and "soundhaspriority".

I will do my best to not get affected by the most probably continuing
hostility, bad behaviour and bitterness to be dislayed by shp.

No, the "hositility, bad behaviour and bitterness" came from YOU, as a
result of you asking me for help to improve your sound gratuis, and me
attempting to do so. I have reams of evidence of your hostility, bad
behaviour and bitterness from your posts to refer to, in case you need
me to refresh your failing memory.


I will do
my best to refrain from responding to him in the like.

But I *do* apoligize for some of the acusations and name calling I
subjected him to during these past days. As far as I am concerned, they
are water under the bridge.

Even though you only said "some" of the accusations and name calling, I
accept your apology. Water, it is.

And I *do* thank him for sharing with us such a "tweak" ..

You're welcome. I told you I was a philanthropist. Just an "evil
philanthropist". ;-)

I will not
dive in to my closet-room, scissors in hand though.

To me, cutting the corners off of clothing labels is a lot more
interesting than playing with pinholed paper, animals and aspirin. Not
merely because it has a much greater effect on sound perception (the
more so the more clothes you treat), but because the very idea is far
removed from your audio system. At least with the pinhole device, you
can place it on your audio components and imagine that there is a
(however remote) connection to the signal path, that its "acting" on
the audio system, somehow. With clothing labels, more than anything,
it's more of a dark hole you plunge into (you're not at all on any
kind of safe grounding here). You're acting on pure faith, since you
can't even imagine a connection to sound. Yet there is no mistaking
the connection is there, once you execute the idea, and attempt to
listen without prejudice.

This much
betterness in sound is more then enough for me, I am not greedy.


Well, you just answered the question: "How far down the rabbit hole do
you want to go?".

It was
quite hard to stop listening to music before, to go to work, take care
of the kid, etc, now it seems it might be damn impossible.

That's exactly what I experience every day with my "extremely modest"
25 year old $300 audio system. I can be writing posts to RAO, and if
there's good music playing on the stereo, I often have to stop,
feeling compelled to go back on the couch and listen. I become totally
enthralled and enveloped by the sound (listening to Dr. John's
"Quatre Parisha", for example). That's what good music reproduction
is all about.


Next I will try the tweak in the living room HT system.

If you're applying the 5-pinhole device to objects in your living
room that contains the HT system, take a look at your video screen. If
you've tweaked enough (even if you don't tweak the video monitor
itself), you may notice it has improved as well.

As to why that "tweak" works the way it works, frankly I have no idea.

That's because you didn't bother to read any of the references I
made to the way it works, in my thesis ("Message to the Ignorant Pigs
of RAO") and elsewhere in my messages. I don't normally do this, but
I'm gonna make it -real easy- for you, friend. This is a quote from a
review of Belt's products "Adventures at the Far End of Reality", by
Roger S. Gordon, CPA:
( http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue8/belt.htm)

"One web address that I keep going back to is www.belt.demon.co.uk, the
site for Peter W. Belt, an Englishman who, for the past twenty years,
has been responsible for some of the most controversial tweaks in the
world of audio. What makes Mr. Belt's tweaks so controversial is his
underlying hypothesis. It is not possible to summarize his theories in
one paragraph, or even one page. You need to spend several hours
reading the material on his website. However, to give you the gist of
it, he is a supporter of Rupert Sheldrake's theory of morphic
resonance. The following is a quote from an article written by
Peter's Belt's wife, Mrs. May Belt, that appeared in The PWB
Newsletter, Number One, Volume 5, in April 2003:.

"... With apologies to Sheldrake who took years to write his books, I
will be very brief in describing Sheldrake's concept."

"Sheldrake's concept is that as soon as anything exists (even a
single thing), there is created a 'morphic resonance' energy
pattern. One simplistic example would be the formation of the first
Quartz crystal when the earth began to cool down. The Quartz crystal
has a specific chemical formula and a specific crystalline structure.
Sheldrake's concept is that there would now exist a 'Quartz crystal
morphic resonance' energy pattern but, if only a single Quartz
crystal existed, then the 'morphic resonance' energy pattern would
be a weak one. As more minerals cooled, as more identical Quartz
crystals were formed (anywhere in the world), the 'Quartz crystal
morphic resonance' energy pattern would become stronger and, because
the Quartz crystal shared the same 'morphic resonance' energy
pattern, they would be 'linked'!! Sheldrake believes that this
concept applies to everything-to animate and inanimate things...."

Mr. Belt believes that his products work because they alter the morphic
resonance energy field surrounding the treated object. Changing the
energy field of the object changes our perception of the object. Thus,
Mr. Belt's products change our perception of the sound coming from
our audio system. The sound is not changed in any way-it is our
brain's interpretation of the sound that is changed. This is not the
sort of concept that receives great acceptance in the mainstream audio
press-you know, the people who say there is no difference between zip
cord and Nordost cables. ..."

All I know is that I felt extremely stupid and silly when preparing it
and applying it.

Everyone always tells me that. That's social conditioning for you.
sigh

Perhaps part of the explanation is the humbleness one
really needs to muster up in oneself to actually go ahead and execute
the "tweak".

That's why so few people even try the tweaks, as my report has shown.
They're too arrogant and unwise to muster up enough humility. Doing
so means they have to admit to themselves, even for a brief moment,
that maybe they don't know how everything in the world works, on
every level of activity in life. And it's much easier to go on
thinking you know it all, then to admit, even to yourself, that you
don't. And to never stop trying to learn new things. Even if they are
new things about yourself that you are learning.


Right now listening to "Bernstein : Diaspora Soul" .. Like never before.

Listening to "Cat Power: The Greatest". Sublime.

Shovels tries to channel the ghost of Audio Clown Past.

If you speak to me respectfully, I will attempt to answer you in kind.

That's pretty much what Ferstler used to say, at least until his bloated ego
finally deflated.






--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

wrote:



- "You're just "search listening"!

This might well be a *part* of the mechanism, still.

I know what "placebo" is, etc, I humbly try to introduce a new concept
with "search listening", really, I even experimented with ABX, etc, to
find out what's going on with them, I am not all that ignorant when it
comes to audio.


- "It's a placebo, fool!"

- "You're insane!"

- "Are you gonna use a Contact C instead of an Aspirin, if your
speakers have a cold?! Haw!"

- "If you didn't DBT it, it didn't just happen!"

- "Can anyone say "Expectation effect"?"


Yup I've had things like this said to me for announcing that I hear the
effects of interconnects, etc, but I don't think my replies were as
sharp tounged as your are.

You are well skilled in the english language, you can use it to much
more good, it cuts both ways.

- "Instead of a picture of a giraffe, perhaps you should have used a
picture of a horse's ass? LOL!"


I just went over to an audiophiole friend and yes, tried the giraffe pic
thing with him. He claimed to hear nothing and he did make fun of me in
a very similar way.


I know. But I did mention as much in my thesis, "Message to Ignorant
Pigs of RAO", didn't I? You know, the "long one" that no one read?


Well if you *name it* like that then it's no surprise that not many read
it, yes? Since reading it would be a tacit acception of being an
ignorant pig. Try a more patient, freindly approach next time. With your
certain skills it would be much better.

There is this "everything sounds the same" type of an howard ferstler
here. Time to time he starts threads like "Just came back to say hello
to you lowlife audiophool scum" etc. Do you think he would make many
friends and converts to his cause with an attitude like that?


No, the "hositility, bad behaviour and bitterness" came from YOU,

I propose we agree to disagree on this one. Yes, by deliberately
escalating I just wanted to get the point across to you that I could
take it to the bitter end (and high speed it was getting there) that I
could double what I got from you and send it back to you. COnflict is
obviously a useless, stupid path to tread.

You had a conflicting stance from your very first post. You had a
radical tweak to offer but the placement of concepts was done so that if
one would not say an immediate "ah yes, well thank you dear mr
soundhaspriority sir" one would get a heap of deragatory flame war
attack coming to him. Even you should accept it that what you talk about
is not at all easy to even think about giving an remote consideration.

BTW: Here is what "scottw" wrote to Sander, and how *you* answered him:

----begin quote
And
with sighted influences all you have to do is sit back, relax, close
your eyes and forget it's there.


That's how a stereo system works, brainiac.


Personally I'm not at all interested in tweaks that really only
alter my mind or its state through any manner.



Are you planning on being an ignorant putz all of your life, Scott? Get
some education. In the quantum world, there is much evidence that
suggest reality is all perception.



That phase of life is long past for me.....except for bourbon
or a little Drambui on the rocks.


You're altering your mind and its state every second of your life.
Guess you don't know squat about biology either.

Get educated, its the cure for your ignorance.

----end quote

You called him a "brainiac" "ignorant putz" etc, and your general
attitude is NEGATIVE ... But here wasn't a *hint* of attack from him to
you. After extended listening to your wonderful tweak, I am thinking of
the irony of it all, that so much negativity could exist with you.

But let's not digress, I do not want to go into a conflicting stance
with you anymore.


Everyone always tells me that. That's social conditioning for you.
sigh


And that's the exact "conditioning" that reacts to your tweaks in a
given way, you should really expect that.

Take care, keep it cool.

Fella wrote:

Are you planning on being an ignorant putz all of your life, Scott? Get
some education. In the quantum world, there is much evidence that
suggest reality is all perception.

LOL, keep grasping that straw. It's the last resort of the 'I don't know why, but it works!'
crowd, in every area of woo-woo. They heard somewhereorother than 'quantum' means 'spooky
action at a distance' or else they vaguely remember that story about Schroedinger's cat, and
they're off to the races Of course, if you had a real clue about quantum effects, you'd hardly
embarrass yourself this way, unless you stood to make a fortune off it, like the charlatan
Deepak CHopra.

When the woo-woo crowd starts yapping about 'quantum', I reach for my gun.

And btw, I'd bet good money a DBT would show Shippy's tweak is useless for altering sound.

Steven Sullivan wrote:


reach for my gun.

Ok. And you go on with your cowboys and indians game.


And btw, I'd bet good money a DBT would show Shippy's tweak is useless for altering sound.


Yes, "shippy"s tweak does *nothing* to the sound, that's for sure. It
more or less tweaks the recipient of the same ol sound, it seems.

Different strokes for different folks, I'd say.

I have an idea Sullivan. Take a piece of paper, put pinholes on the
edges and center ... well you know the rest.

Fella wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:


reach for my gun.

Ok. And you go on with your cowboys and indians game.

It's a common expression.


And btw, I'd bet good money a DBT would show Shippy's tweak is useless for altering sound.


Yes, "shippy"s tweak does *nothing* to the sound, that's for sure. It
more or less tweaks the recipient of the same ol sound, it seems.

Different strokes for different folks, I'd say.

I have an idea Sullivan. Take a piece of paper, put pinholes on the
edges and center ... well you know the rest.

If I attach it to you, does it change your tune?



___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

Fella said:

snips.


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.

That, and extensive enjoyment of your sound system.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

Fella wrote:
wrote:



- "You're just "search listening"!

This might well be a *part* of the mechanism, still.

You will find out how wrong you are, but it might take a few months, or
whatever your standard is. I told you that I have been experimenting
with advanced audio techniques for 20 years. The effect hasn't worn
off.

I know what "placebo" is, etc, I humbly try to introduce a new concept
with "search listening", really, I even experimented with ABX, etc, to
find out what's going on with them, I am not all that ignorant when it
comes to audio.

I have experimented with ABX plenty, I know what's going on with
that. Nothing any audiophile need concern themselves about. ABX and
DBTs are strictly for dogmatists and polemicists, to feel good about
themselves, to feel that they are rational, sane people.


Yup I've had things like this said to me for announcing that I hear the
effects of interconnects, etc, but I don't think my replies were as
sharp tounged as your are.
You are well skilled in the english language, you can use it to much
more good, it cuts both ways.

Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly. For a group that was
extremely hostile to me right from the get go, and is more than ever, I
figure I'm doing more than "enough" good by leaving my ideas with
them. Look at what the record says. That's already far more than most
people here have ever done in the history of RAO, to help their fellow
audiophiles. So no, I don't feel any more obligation than that, mate.
Especially since I've been called a "shill" and a "crook" once too
many times by RAO members, for trying to help people (who are
interested in enlightening themselves about audio) with free ideas.

I just went over to an audiophiole friend and yes, tried the giraffe pic
thing with him. He claimed to hear nothing and he did make fun of me in
a very similar way.

Welcome to my world! Keep in mind that people who have a very strong
resistance at the idea that such things can have an effect, are in
fact, capable of producing what I call a "reverse placebo". That's
assuming they even have the listening skill to determine such changes
to begin with. I recall having tested the 5-pinhole tweak on my wife.
But in order to eliminate the reverse placebo effect (negative
expectation), I did not tell her what I was testing, only asked if any
changes were detected. She was able to detected changes when the device
was applied, almost every time. So think in this case, the best thing
is to not tell the person what you are doing.

I know. But I did mention as much in my thesis, "Message to Ignorant
Pigs of RAO", didn't I? You know, the "long one" that no one read?


Well if you *name it* like that then it's no surprise that not many read
it, yes?

Perhaps, but don't forget, I have to read it too. It has to interest
me more than anybody, because if it doesn't, why write it?

Since reading it would be a tacit acception of being an
ignorant pig.

No. Fitting the description I gave in the message about what I defined
as an "ignorant pig" would be a tacit acceptance of being an ignorant
pig. A fact is a fact and a truth is a truth. No one has yet argued
against any of the statements I made in that message. My calling
someone an ignorant pig is not a condmenation. Accepting being an
ignorant swine (or "bigot" if you prefer....) is the first step to
overcoming your ignorance. Where I come from, you simply don't mock,
deride, ridicule and condemn ideas without ever trying them or knowing
anything about them. According to my standards of behaviour, that's
being an ignorant swine. Apparently, my standards of behaviour differ
from those on RAO.

Try a more patient, freindly approach next time. With your
certain skills it would be much better.
There is this "everything sounds the same" type of an howard ferstler
here. Time to time he starts threads like "Just came back to say hello
to you lowlife audiophool scum" etc. Do you think he would make many
friends and converts to his cause with an attitude like that?

Oh yes. Ferstler. The Alfred E. Neumann of audio. I don't think his
intention was to make many friends and converts, and neither was mine.
He knows the mindset of RAOers, and I do even better than he does. He
knows how rare it is to get any one here, arrogant and dogmatic as
everyone is, to change their minds about anything, especially audio.
Besides, he's too old to try and I'm not naive enough to try.

No, the "hositility, bad behaviour and bitterness" came from YOU,

I propose we agree to disagree on this one. Yes, by deliberately
escalating I just wanted to get the point across to you that I could
take it to the bitter end (and high speed it was getting there) that I
could double what I got from you and send it back to you. COnflict is
obviously a useless, stupid path to tread.

Especially with me. Especially if you knew who you were dealing with in
the first place. (Check out my last alias here, "Jamie Benchimol", for
starters at what you were up against. I'm the guy who very nearly put
Kreuger behind bars. Just because I didn't like his face). You could
never "double" what you got from me, because it would automatically be
quadrupled by the time it came back to you. No one on the history of
this newsgroup has ever launched more intensified attacks than I have.
You got off VERY easy because "soundhaspriority" is just a little
lambiekins.... I've penned him up so I can't take him very far out
of his box.


You had a conflicting stance from your very first post. You had a
radical tweak to offer but the placement of concepts was done so that if
one would not say an immediate "ah yes, well thank you dear mr
soundhaspriority sir" one would get a heap of deragatory flame war
attack coming to him.

I know, but as I mentioned in my thesis (Message to Ignorant Pigs of
RAO), I wrote that very post in order to get the old "attack machine"
going. Because if we aren't gonna mix it up", then what's the
purpose of RAO? To advance audio ideas and further our knowledge of
audio? LOL! Gimme a break! It,s to attack each other, plain and
simple. If people learn somehting new about audio by acciden,t, amidst
all the flak flying about, then great. I'm happy for them. Initially,
I just thought I would get to attack the ignorant objectivists. But
then when the subs also started in with me, then it became a
free-for-all. But hey... more grist for the attack mill....

Even you should accept it that what you talk about
is not at all easy to even think about giving an remote consideration.

Yeah, I know that too. But I believe that people should challenge
themselves to think (or not think so much), and not count on me to
persuade them to do so.

BTW: Here is what "scottw" wrote to Sander, and how *you* answered him:

----begin quote
And
with sighted influences all you have to do is sit back, relax, close
your eyes and forget it's there.


That's how a stereo system works, brainiac.


Oh, that's very meaningful. You take a quote out of context. But you
don't show the context of ScottW's rotten, insulting attitude
toward me, seen in his entire body of posts written to or about me. But
even in what you quoted, there's the fact that Scott's making an
ignorant and wrongful statement, just to take up a position contrary to
the popular and accepted notion that sighted listening is the only type
of listening pertinent to consumer audio by consumers. I simply pointed
out his ignorance of how a stereo works. He's as much an attack dog
as you and most RAO regulars are. It is entirely hypocritical to
criticize someone for responding to attacks and insults with attacks
and insults.

Personally I'm not at all interested in tweaks that really only
alter my mind or its state through any manner.


Are you planning on being an ignorant putz all of your life, Scott? Get
some education. In the quantum world, there is much evidence that
suggest reality is all perception.

Again, I don't see your point. Scott made yet another ignorant
statement about my tweaks, which he knows nothing about. They do not
"only alter your mind" and if they do, then it can be argued that ALL
audio phenomena works this way. The same brain that hears effects of my
tweaks is the same brain that hears the effects of all audio devices.

You called him a "brainiac" "ignorant putz" etc, and your general
attitude is NEGATIVE ... But here wasn't a *hint* of attack from him to
you.

There isn't a single post Scott ever wrote to or about me that
didn't contain an attack or insult.

After extended listening to your wonderful tweak, I am thinking of
the irony of it all, that so much negativity could exist with you.

Now, do you want me to show how NEGATIVE your posts were to me? The
ones where you are tearing your eyes out, calling me a whore, a ****ing
cocksucker, a piece of **** (and those are just the kinder words that
you spared for me)? I have NEVER written anything like that to you, nor
have I EVER even said anything to you that would warrant the kinds of
attacks you heaped upon me, which were entirely inexplicable hostility,
AFAIC.


But let's not digress, I do not want to go into a conflicting stance
with you anymore.

Fine, then don't!

Everyone always tells me that. That's social conditioning for you.
sigh


And that's the exact "conditioning" that reacts to your tweaks in a
given way, you should really expect that.

I do expect that. I even talk about it all the time!

wrote:
Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly.
An explanation as to why perhaps there are no mirrors in your
caravan and your so sad.
Especially since I've been called a "shill" and a "crook" once too
many times by RAO members
A fact is a fact and a truth is a truth. No one has yet argued
against any of the statements I made in that message.
Must not have read many of the responding posts.
Where I come from, you simply don't mock,
deride, ridicule and condemn ideas without ever trying them or
knowing
anything about them. According to my standards of behaviour, that's
being an ignorant swine. Apparently, my standards of behaviour
differ
from those on RAO
( many lines of jerking off snipped)
Many of your posts must have leaked out a quantum rift from a parallel
newsgroup from some mad scientist dot com

Sander deWaal wrote:
Fella said:

snips.


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.

It may well be a fountain of "something*...but calling it 'information' is rather a stretch.

That, and extensive enjoyment of your sound system.

Somehow I manage that very well even without the new 'information'.

Let me know when Middius signs on to the new enlightenment...it can't be long
now.

wrote:
wrote:
Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly.
An explanation as to why perhaps there are no mirrors in your
caravan and your so sad.
Especially since I've been called a "shill" and a "crook" once too
many times by RAO members
A fact is a fact and a truth is a truth. No one has yet argued
against any of the statements I made in that message.
Must not have read many of the responding posts.
Where I come from, you simply don't mock,
deride, ridicule and condemn ideas without ever trying them or
knowing
anything about them. According to my standards of behaviour, that's
being an ignorant swine. Apparently, my standards of behaviour
differ
from those on RAO
( many lines of jerking off snipped)
Many of your posts must have leaked out a quantum rift from a parallel
newsgroup from some mad scientist dot com

A quantum particle disappears momentarily before reappearing... do you
ever wonder where it goes? I say it is in the same alternate universe
we'd find your intelligence in.

Don't you have anything better to do than making dumb smarmy remarks to
me all day every day?

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Sander deWaal wrote:
Fella said:

snips.


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.

It may well be a fountain of "something*...but calling it 'information' is rather a stretch.

How would you know, you're an ignorant bumwipe who's never even tried
it?


That, and extensive enjoyment of your sound system.

Somehow I manage that very well even without the new 'information'.

Then what are you doing on an audiophile group if you think you have
the best sounding system possible?


Let me know when Middius signs on to the new enlightenment...it can't be long
now.

I will let you know that Shovels was the first here to try the
5-pinhole paper tweak.

Steven Sullivan, defines for us the "ignorant bigot" as described by
soundhaspriority in his post "Message For the Ignorant Pigs of RAO":

Fella wrote:

Are you planning on being an ignorant putz all of your life, Scott? Get
some education. In the quantum world, there is much evidence that
suggest reality is all perception.

LOL, keep grasping that straw. It's the last resort of the 'I don't know why, but it works!'
crowd, in every area of woo-woo.

Listen good: There are an infinite number of things in the universe
that you "don't know why" they are, because you know nothing about
them; including the tweaks I've posted. If everything that an ignoramus
like you didn't know about did not exist, then this would be one big
old empty world indeed. You are the epitomy of the dumb, arrogant
bigot. The Archie Bunker of the audio groups, to put it in terms you'd
understand.

They heard somewhereorother than 'quantum' means 'spooky
action at a distance' or else they vaguely remember that story about Schroedinger's cat, and
they're off to the races Of course, if you had a real clue about quantum effects, you'd hardly
embarrass yourself this way, unless you stood to make a fortune off it, like the charlatan
Deepak CHopra.

No one here tried the tweaks because they understood them or thought
they did. Otherwise, they wouldn't still be saying they don't know how
it works, idiot. What they do know is that they do work, and what we
know, is that you who would liberally mock and deride them for doing
what you are afraid to, have never tried the experiments yourself to be
able to speak with any credibility.

Therefore your ignorant, unsupported opinions are worthless pap.


When the woo-woo crowd starts yapping about 'quantum', I reach for my gun.

Don't just "reach for your gun". Do us all a favour, put it up to your
temple and pull the trigger already.

And btw, I'd bet good money a DBT would show Shippy's tweak is useless for altering sound.

It doesn't "alter sound", you moron. That shows you don't even have an
elementary understanding of what you're dismissing out of hand. I'll
bet good money a DBT would show that you have 35% of your brain matter
missing. And the rest is made of gruyere cheese.

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly.
An explanation as to why perhaps there are no mirrors in your
caravan and your so sad.
Especially since I've been called a "shill" and a "crook" once too
many times by RAO members
A fact is a fact and a truth is a truth. No one has yet argued
against any of the statements I made in that message.
Must not have read many of the responding posts.
Where I come from, you simply don't mock,
deride, ridicule and condemn ideas without ever trying them or
knowing
anything about them. According to my standards of behaviour, that's
being an ignorant swine. Apparently, my standards of behaviour
differ
from those on RAO
( many lines of jerking off snipped)
Many of your posts must have leaked out a quantum rift from a parallel
newsgroup from some mad scientist dot com

A quantum particle disappears momentarily before reappearing... do you
ever wonder where it goes? I say it is in the same alternate universe
we'd find your intelligence in.

Don't you have anything better to do than making dumb smarmy remarks to
me all day every day?

It's intrigueing to see you non-reply and throw out your
pitiful insults. Maybe they just go out of sight.
Measurements are only as good as the tools.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...



Shovels tries to channel the ghost of Audio Clown Past.



Something best left to 'Perfessionals'.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Steven Sullivan said:


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.


It may well be a fountain of "something*...but calling it 'information' is rather a stretch.


Are you less courageous than Fella, or me?
At least, when you've tried the tweak, you know of what you speak.

Now, you're just guessing.


That, and extensive enjoyment of your sound system.


Somehow I manage that very well even without the new 'information'.


That's cool, I thought the same, only last week.


Let me know when Middius signs on to the new enlightenment...it can't be long
now.


You *do* realize that finally, after 10 years, this newsgroup isn't
all about bashing Arny anymore, but there's actually a discussion
about audio?

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.


It may well be a fountain of "something*...but calling it 'information' is rather a stretch.


Are you less courageous than Fella, or me?


I didn't know it was a matter of 'courage', Sander. Actually,
it's that I'm rather too lazy to set up the *proper* test of such a claim.
I'm rarely inclined to test every nut-hatched claim I come across on
the Internet.


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you 'tested'
the tweak.

It would be exactly the same were I to perform the tweak as you
did, and report the same results.


At least, when you've tried the tweak, you know of what you speak.

Now, you're just guessing.


I've never tried a perpetual motion device before, but I'm
guessing they don't work, either.


Has your standard of proof always been *this* low, Sander?
I thought you were one of the more rational people here.


That, and extensive enjoyment of your sound system.


Somehow I manage that very well even without the new 'information'.


That's cool, I thought the same, only last week.

I still think so, this week.


Let me know when Middius signs on to the new enlightenment...it can't be long
now.


You *do* realize that finally, after 10 years, this newsgroup isn't
all about bashing Arny anymore, but there's actually a discussion
about audio?


LOL. Well, it's a discussion of *something* that some seem to
*believe* is about audio... I guess that's a start.

What it's really about is the persistence of human folly.


___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


As usual in life, it turns out that things were not black & white at all.


You see?
All the man was asking was to actually *try* it, and a fountain of
information is coming your way.


It may well be a fountain of "something*...but calling it 'information' is rather a stretch.


Are you less courageous than Fella, or me?


I didn't know it was a matter of 'courage', Sander.

It is in your case.

Actually,
it's that I'm rather too lazy to set up the *proper* test of such a claim.

Yeah right! Excuses, excuses, Sullivan. You're not too lazy or busy
to hack out hundreds and thousands of lines decrying the tweaks, but
now we're to believe you're simply too "lazy" to take 30 seconds to
test it out?

If its so difficult for you to test an audio phenomenon, you must not
have upgraded your audio system in the last 65 years. And you want US
to follow YOUR dogmatic beliefs, while you condemn us for not doing
so??


I'm rarely inclined to test every nut-hatched claim I come across on
the Internet.

Yet you don't have a problem "claiming" that the claims are "nut
hatched" or the proponents of the claim are "insane", whilst admitting
that you are too "lazy" to properly test the claims to see if they are
valid, or if you are the arrogant bigoted **** that I say you are.



Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you 'tested'
the tweak.
It would be exactly the same were I to perform the tweak as you
did, and report the same results.

So then shut up and test the tweak according to YOUR belief system.
What is "typical lousy logic" is ignorant dogmatists like yourself
condemning tweaks you've never tested, and who's working theories
you don't understand, and THEN turning around and calling yourself a
"scientist" and expecting people to believe you!

At least, when you've tried the tweak, you know of what you speak.

Now, you're just guessing.

Is that so? "Guessing" is ALL that you do on this group, Sullivan!

Has your standard of proof always been *this* low, Sander?
I thought you were one of the more rational people here.

"Rational" = "dogmatic" on this group. Say what you really mean,
Sullivan. GIven how you sweepingly dismiss everything you know nothing
about, you're no more rational than a rabid dog.

Let me know when Middius signs on to the new enlightenment...it can't be long
now.


You *do* realize that finally, after 10 years, this newsgroup isn't
all about bashing Arny anymore, but there's actually a discussion
about audio?


LOL. Well, it's a discussion of *something* that some seem to
*believe* is about audio... I guess that's a start.

And so you start attacking them for their beliefs, despite showing no
evidence for doing so. What a unique approach on this group.

What it's really about is the persistence of human folly.

That pretty much describes your entire history on this newsgroup;
attempting to convert disciples to your audio religion. So far, in how
many years? You've converted exactly: none. Arny? In 10 years, has
converted exactly: 0. Me? In 2 months, converted: 2.

That says a lot about how useful your "ABX", "DBT" and so-called
"objectivism" is to audiophiles. Either you get on board the new audio
revolution or you get left behind. Your choice. Either way, in 40-50
years, what people are talking about now about these tweaks will all
make sense to you........

.......'Course you'll be dead then.


___
-SHP
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - Steven
Sullivan

Steven Sullivan said:


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you 'tested'
the tweak.


This is exactly the same as someone telling here that amplifier X is
sounding so much better than amplifier Y.

For him, that is true.
No need to prove anything, as it is his perception.


It would be exactly the same were I to perform the tweak as you
did, and report the same results.


Yep, and the only thing I'd say to you would be "Congrats! Enjoy your
newfound consciousness and audio system!"


Has your standard of proof always been *this* low, Sander?
I thought you were one of the more rational people here.


If you can define "rational" for me, then I can answer that question.

I'm still an EE, I can still calculate Ohm's law, and I can still
manage not to burn myself with my soldering iron.

Why is everybody thinking that I suddenly lost all of my abilities?
I *gained* some, not lost some.


You *do* realize that finally, after 10 years, this newsgroup isn't
all about bashing Arny anymore, but there's actually a discussion
about audio?


LOL. Well, it's a discussion of *something* that some seem to
*believe* is about audio... I guess that's a start.


Good, I'm glad we agree about that.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you 'tested'
the tweak.


This is exactly the same as someone telling here that amplifier X is
sounding so much better than amplifier Y.

Except that there are credible reasons why one amp could really sound different
from another, founded in normal physics and engineering.

For him, that is true.
No need to prove anything, as it is his perception.

Which may have only a glancing relations to reality. That's magical
thinking for you.


It would be exactly the same were I to perform the tweak as you
did, and report the same results.

Yep, and the only thing I'd say to you would be "Congrats! Enjoy your
newfound consciousness and audio system!"

Thanks, now, quick, hand me some more of that Kool Aid!


Has your standard of proof always been *this* low, Sander?
I thought you were one of the more rational people here.

If you can define "rational" for me, then I can answer that question.

How about we start with : how would you determine if anything *wasn't* true?
Does the emperor *always* wear clothes?

I'm still an EE, I can still calculate Ohm's law, and I can still
manage not to burn myself with my soldering iron.

Why bother with all that 'law' stuff? If you believe in some
other relationship between volts to ohms to amps, go for it! Build
your gear based on that! Just so long as it makes you feel good!

Why is everybody thinking that I suddenly lost all of my abilities?
I *gained* some, not lost some.


Well, you'd 'gain' something by a full-blown florid psychosis,
by that definition.

Have you considered that perhaps the tweak has no real effect?
If you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?
That some things are all in your mind? ( This isn't like watching a TV,
btw. THere are ways to demonstrate that turning on the telly really
does change what it puts out visually. )



You *do* realize that finally, after 10 years, this newsgroup isn't
all about bashing Arny anymore, but there's actually a discussion
about audio?


LOL. Well, it's a discussion of *something* that some seem to
*believe* is about audio... I guess that's a start.


Good, I'm glad we agree about that.


I didn't say I was part of the 'some'.


___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you 'tested'
the tweak.


This is exactly the same as someone telling here that amplifier X is
sounding so much better than amplifier Y.

Except that there are credible reasons why one amp could really sound different
from another, founded in normal physics and engineering.

AND YET.... Arny and other so-called "objectivist audiophiles" keep
touting the notion that amplifiers, when operated within their
specifications and properly functioning, can not be told apart under
ABX conditions. Isn't that what all the hoo-ha with Zipser was about?


For him, that is true.
No need to prove anything, as it is his perception.

Which may have only a glancing relations to reality.

Except they don't. They've already been perceived by people who
didn't know they were in place.

That's magical
thinking for you.

No, "magical thinking" is believing the world starts and ends with that
which you can measure.

Yep, and the only thing I'd say to you would be "Congrats! Enjoy your
newfound consciousness and audio system!"

Thanks, now, quick, hand me some more of that Kool Aid!

God, drink up and die already! With all this Kool Aid and shooting
yourself, why do you keep popping your face back here?

If you can define "rational" for me, then I can answer that question.

How about we start with : how would you determine if anything *wasn't* true?

Oh, I know that one! That's easy. You listen. If you don't hear a
different, it isn't true.

I'm still an EE, I can still calculate Ohm's law, and I can still
manage not to burn myself with my soldering iron.

Why bother with all that 'law' stuff? If you believe in some
other relationship between volts to ohms to amps, go for it! Build
your gear based on that! Just so long as it makes you feel good!

Well obviously, you're irrational, so thank you, you've just
defined it for us.

Well, you'd 'gain' something by a full-blown florid psychosis,
by that definition.

Sounds like you already have the psychosis.


Have you considered that perhaps the tweak has no real effect?
If you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?

Now the reverse. Have you considered that perhaps the tweaks HAVE a
real effect?
And if you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?
I doubt it. You're a very unwise person, Sullivan.


That some things are all in your mind? ( This isn't like watching a TV,
btw. THere are ways to demonstrate that turning on the telly really
does change what it puts out visually. )

ALL things are all in our minds, Sullivan. What you don't know about
science and the world around us, would fill 1,000 NY Public Libraries.
And that would just be the section on quantum mechanics that you
don't know about. Whether you see an object or visualize that same
object, your brain can't tell the difference between the two, it
processes the information the same. We create our reality, it's all
in the mind. Stop complaining about it and learn to deal with it
already.

___
-SHP
"I was only accused of rape, never indicted" - Steven Sullivan

wrote in message
oups.com...

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was
due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you
'tested'
the tweak.


This is exactly the same as someone telling here that amplifier X is
sounding so much better than amplifier Y.

Except that there are credible reasons why one amp could really sound
different
from another, founded in normal physics and engineering.

AND YET.... Arny and other so-called "objectivist audiophiles" keep
touting the notion that amplifiers, when operated within their
specifications and properly functioning, can not be told apart under
ABX conditions. Isn't that what all the hoo-ha with Zipser was about?


For him, that is true.
No need to prove anything, as it is his perception.

Which may have only a glancing relations to reality.

Except they don't. They've already been perceived by people who
didn't know they were in place.

That's magical
thinking for you.

No, "magical thinking" is believing the world starts and ends with that
which you can measure.

Yep, and the only thing I'd say to you would be "Congrats! Enjoy your
newfound consciousness and audio system!"

Thanks, now, quick, hand me some more of that Kool Aid!

God, drink up and die already! With all this Kool Aid and shooting
yourself, why do you keep popping your face back here?

If you can define "rational" for me, then I can answer that question.

How about we start with : how would you determine if anything *wasn't*
true?

Oh, I know that one! That's easy. You listen. If you don't hear a
different, it isn't true.

I'm still an EE, I can still calculate Ohm's law, and I can still
manage not to burn myself with my soldering iron.

Why bother with all that 'law' stuff? If you believe in some
other relationship between volts to ohms to amps, go for it! Build
your gear based on that! Just so long as it makes you feel good!

Well obviously, you're irrational, so thank you, you've just
defined it for us.

Well, you'd 'gain' something by a full-blown florid psychosis,
by that definition.

Sounds like you already have the psychosis.


Have you considered that perhaps the tweak has no real effect?
If you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?

Now the reverse. Have you considered that perhaps the tweaks HAVE a
real effect?
And if you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?
I doubt it. You're a very unwise person, Sullivan.


That some things are all in your mind? ( This isn't like watching a TV,
btw. THere are ways to demonstrate that turning on the telly really
does change what it puts out visually. )

ALL things are all in our minds, Sullivan. What you don't know about
science and the world around us, would fill 1,000 NY Public Libraries.
And that would just be the section on quantum mechanics that you
don't know about. Whether you see an object or visualize that same
object, your brain can't tell the difference between the two, it
processes the information the same. We create our reality, it's all
in the mind. Stop complaining about it and learn to deal with it
already.

My evil twin actually knows nothing about quantum mechanics, except to
invoke it to explain the unreasonable or ridiculous. Quantum mechanics is a
closed axiomatic system akin to Euclidean plane geometry. Quantum mechanics
is not an ontological theory. In other words, it explains nothing about the
universe, it's origins, or how it works. The distinction is lost on my evil
twin. The only validity of quantum mechanics is, that when mapped correctly
onto a physical system, it predicts numbers that can be verified repeatably
by experiment. Unfortunately, frauds exploit the mystery of quantum
mechanics to wrap their own obfuscations, as in, "quantum mechanics is
inherently incomprehensible, hence, I justify a dubious assertion by
reference to it." In reality, such frauds are no deeper than the adverts
that blast 'AS SEEN ON TV."

The notion that we create our own reality is a cute one, but it is a vast
and currently unjustifiable leap from the questions of the Solvay
conference. It is certainly true that consciousness has not, and may never,
be integrated into the framework of "causal reality." However, my evil twin
appears to have leaped to the conclusion that reality is subject to our free
manipulation. Individuals who have used hallucinogenic drugs, particularly
LSD, have experienced extreme perceptual warping. On occasion, such
individuals have committed self destructive acts, such as jumping out of
windows, or off rooftops. When the person hits the ground, their perception
of a different reality is broken, along with alot of bones. Is this a
drastic form of the "correspondence principle"? I think not, but this is not
the real issue. The real issue is that we may exist as beings restricted to
subspaces of both action and thought. If we are so restricted, then we are
not privileged to answer the question. In fact, such searches would be
doomed to circularity.

These are very grave questions. It's a preposterous joke that a breakthrough
in understanding the role of the "observer", as noted by the Solvay
Conference, would come in the form of a green cream one smears on audio
equipment. These are questions of very existence, of ontology, of every
aspect of our universe large and small. Black holes the mass of three
billion suns run according to the hidden answers to and of ontology. Are we
to believe that some proprietor selling green cream (without any explanation
as to how it works, except the words "quantum mechanics, As Seen on TV,
Quantum TV"), has found how to manipulation of reality to better our
pleasure? NOT. These are traps for the gullible and stupid. Don't give your
money to my evil twin; use it for good purpose.

SHP (good twin)

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
wrote:
Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly.
An explanation as to why perhaps there are no mirrors in your
caravan and your so sad.
Especially since I've been called a "shill" and a "crook" once too
many times by RAO members
A fact is a fact and a truth is a truth. No one has yet argued
against any of the statements I made in that message.
Must not have read many of the responding posts.
Where I come from, you simply don't mock,
deride, ridicule and condemn ideas without ever trying them or
knowing
anything about them. According to my standards of behaviour, that's
being an ignorant swine. Apparently, my standards of behaviour
differ
from those on RAO
( many lines of jerking off snipped)
Many of your posts must have leaked out a quantum rift from a parallel
newsgroup from some mad scientist dot com

A quantum particle disappears momentarily before reappearing... do you
ever wonder where it goes? I say it is in the same alternate universe
we'd find your intelligence in.

Don't you have anything better to do than making dumb smarmy remarks to
me all day every day?

Hahaha! Bro, he is clever! 'Scuse the shakin and jigglin.

soundhaspriority, aka Robert Morein off his medication, who as usual,
doesn't know what he's ranting about, but drops by anyway with his
strawman, props it up, talks and argues with self, bores everyone to
death within a 50 mile radius:

wrote in message
oups.com...

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
Steven Sullivan said:


Your 'experience' is nothing unusual. You changed something; you
'heard' a difference; you concluded the difference was real and was
due
to the change you made. It's typical lousy logic that ignored other
possible conclusions, and it's worthless as proof, given the way you
'tested'
the tweak.


This is exactly the same as someone telling here that amplifier X is
sounding so much better than amplifier Y.

Except that there are credible reasons why one amp could really sound
different
from another, founded in normal physics and engineering.

AND YET.... Arny and other so-called "objectivist audiophiles" keep
touting the notion that amplifiers, when operated within their
specifications and properly functioning, can not be told apart under
ABX conditions. Isn't that what all the hoo-ha with Zipser was about?


For him, that is true.
No need to prove anything, as it is his perception.

Which may have only a glancing relations to reality.

Except they don't. They've already been perceived by people who
didn't know they were in place.

That's magical
thinking for you.

No, "magical thinking" is believing the world starts and ends with that
which you can measure.

Yep, and the only thing I'd say to you would be "Congrats! Enjoy your
newfound consciousness and audio system!"

Thanks, now, quick, hand me some more of that Kool Aid!

God, drink up and die already! With all this Kool Aid and shooting
yourself, why do you keep popping your face back here?

If you can define "rational" for me, then I can answer that question.

How about we start with : how would you determine if anything *wasn't*
true?

Oh, I know that one! That's easy. You listen. If you don't hear a
different, it isn't true.

I'm still an EE, I can still calculate Ohm's law, and I can still
manage not to burn myself with my soldering iron.

Why bother with all that 'law' stuff? If you believe in some
other relationship between volts to ohms to amps, go for it! Build
your gear based on that! Just so long as it makes you feel good!

Well obviously, you're irrational, so thank you, you've just
defined it for us.

Well, you'd 'gain' something by a full-blown florid psychosis,
by that definition.

Sounds like you already have the psychosis.


Have you considered that perhaps the tweak has no real effect?
If you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?

Now the reverse. Have you considered that perhaps the tweaks HAVE a
real effect?
And if you found that to be true, would it amount to a gain in wisdom?
I doubt it. You're a very unwise person, Sullivan.


That some things are all in your mind? ( This isn't like watching a TV,
btw. THere are ways to demonstrate that turning on the telly really
does change what it puts out visually. )

ALL things are all in our minds, Sullivan. What you don't know about
science and the world around us, would fill 1,000 NY Public Libraries.
And that would just be the section on quantum mechanics that you
don't know about. Whether you see an object or visualize that same
object, your brain can't tell the difference between the two, it
processes the information the same. We create our reality, it's all
in the mind. Stop complaining about it and learn to deal with it
already.


My ebil twinb ackual knows nodigg bou' kantum mechanics, duuhhhh, except t'
inboke it t' explain de unreasonaggle or ridiculous. Gawlly!Kantum mechanics is a
closid axiomatic syssem akin t' Euclidean plane geometry. Um uh.Kantum mechanics
is not an ontological deory. Gawlly!In odeh words, duuhhhh, it explains nodigg bou' de
ubehse, uh uh uh, it's origins, duuhhhh, or duh, how it works. De distincshun is lost on my ebil
twin. De on balidity of kantum mechanics is, duuhhhh, dat when mappid correck
onto a physical syssem, it predicts numbehehs dat can be behifiid repeatab
by expehimin. Unf'tunate, frauds exploit de myssehy of kantum
mechanics t' wrap deir own obfuscashuns, duuhhhh, as in, "kantum mechanics is
inhehent inc'prehenstiggle, hess, I dgustify a dubious assehshun by
refehess t' it." In reality, such frauds are no deepeh dan de adbehts
dat blast 'AS SEEN ON TB."

De noshun dat webuh crate our own reality is a coot one, uh uh uh, but it is a bast
'n current undgustifiaggle leap from de kesshuns of de Solbay
confehess. Duh.It is cehtain true dat consciousness has not, uh, 'n may nebeh,
be integratid into the, uh uh uh, framework of "causal reality." Duh, howebeh, my ebil twinb
appears t' habe leapid to the, errr, conclushun dat reality is subbuhjeck t' our free
manipulashun. Lee me lone!Indibiduals who habe usid hallucinogenic drugs, duuhhhh, particular
LSD, habe expehiessd extreme pehceptual warpigg. On occashun, such
indibiduals habe committid self destruckibe acks, duuhhhh, such as dgumpigg out of
winblows, or off rooftops. When de pehson hits de ground, uh uh uh uh, deir pehcepshun
of a diffehent reality is broke, along wid alot of bones. Is dis a
drastic f'm of de "correpondess princible", duh...uh...? I dink not, uh, but dis is not
de real issue. Lee me lone!De real issue dat webuh may exist as beiggs restrictid to
subspaces of bod ackion 'n dought. If webuh are so restricted, uh uh uh uh, den webuh are
not pribilegid to answebuhr de kesshun. In fack, such searches wudd be
doomid to circularity.

Dese are behy grabe kesshuns. It's a prepostehous dgoke dat a breakdrough
in undehstandigg de role of de "obsehbeh", as notid by de Solbay
Confehess, wudd come in the, uh uh uh, form of a green cream one smears on audio
ekipmin. Dese are kesshuns of behy existess, of ontology, of ebehy
aspeck of our ubehse large 'n small. GEE danks.Black holes de mass of
dree
billion suns run accordigg t' de hibben answebuhrs t' and of ontology. Are webuh
t' beliebe dat some proprietor selligg green cream (widout any explanashun
as t' how it works, duuhhhh, except the, uh, the words "kantum mechanics, duuhhhh, As Seen on TB,
Kantum TB"), has found duh, how t' manipulashun of reality t' betteh our
blehbshur, duh...uh...? NOT. Dese are traps f' de gulliggle 'n sputid. Don't gibe your
money t' my ebil twin; use it f' good purpose.


I hade your boring strawman rant translated, Morein. Now it's more
meanginful, don't you think?


SHP (good twin)


If you're the "good twin", and you lie about having tried and enjoyed
the L-shape tweak, you threaten and harass the real Dr. Graham and his
colleagues (who you still think I am).... then I'd hate see what my
self-professed "evil twin" looks like.

Got some bad news for you, Crazy Robert: You're not my twin. You're
just "evil".

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority, aka Robert Morein off his medication, who as usual,
doesn't know what he's ranting about, but drops by anyway with his
strawman, props it up, talks and argues with self, bores everyone to
death within a 50 mile radius:

Richard, I think you know the falsity of your assertion, which makes you
simply a shill. You're shilling for PWB Electronics.

Many, if not most people who read the paragraphs will grasp some of it.
Qmech is just a bunch of axioms. You have not published a link to any
article that extends the axioms of quantum mechanics to cover "green morphic
grease." And I don't think that putting it through the "jive" filter will
make people sympathize with your point of view.

So run it through the "jive filter." The original is still here to read.

soundhaspriority aka Robert Morein suffering from psychosis pretending
he is me, wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority, aka Robert Morein off his medication, who as usual,
doesn't know what he's ranting about, but drops by anyway with his
strawman, props it up, talks and argues with self, bores everyone to
death within a 50 mile radius:

Richard, I think you know the falsity of your assertion, which makes you
simply a shill. You're shilling for PWB Electronics.

Who's Richard? At some point back there, you went from "raging neurotic
Robert Morein" to "raging psychotic Robert Morein". What happened,
Robert? Are you no longer able to afford the medication that should be
taking care of these problems? After your obsession with me was
starting to concern me, you switched your neurosis to a full blown
psychosis, and you now claim to be me, as you post under my name
"soundhasprioriy". But you also claim that I am Dr. Richard Graham (you
claimed this from the beginning, although you never shown any solid,
incontrovertible evidence that I was, and ignored the mountain of
evidence and confirmation from others that said I wasn't). Since you're
posting under my name believing that you are me, that would make YOU
Dr. Richard Graham.

Which makes YOU the shill, here.

So thank you Richard, but no thank you. I don't want to buy any of your
"morphic green grease", you can keep that **** to yourself, thank you
very much. You're not gonna brainwash me into buying your "white
quantum jelly" either, nutball.

Take your business ELSEWHERE - alt.psychotics perhaps. They might be
interested in what you have to sell.

Many, if not most people who read the paragraphs will grasp some of it.
Qmech is just a bunch of axioms. You have not published a link to any
article that extends the axioms of quantum mechanics to cover "green morphic
grease."

I've never talked about "green morphic grease", and don't even know
what that is, so once again, you're setting up your own ridiculous
strawman arguments in order to argue with yourself, because apparently,
no one else wants to play with the insane neurotic boy. But let me
guess: "green morphic grease" comes from somewhere deep inside your
nose, when you go searching for buried treasure?

And ah' duzn't dink dat puttin' it drough de " JIBE" filta' gots'ta
make sucka's sympadize wid yo' point uh view.

Watchu talkin' 'bout, Willis?

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority aka Robert Morein suffering from psychosis pretending
he is me, wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority, aka Robert Morein off his medication, who as usual,
doesn't know what he's ranting about, but drops by anyway with his
strawman, props it up, talks and argues with self, bores everyone to
death within a 50 mile radius:

Richard, I think you know the falsity of your assertion, which makes you
simply a shill. You're shilling for PWB Electronics.

Who's Richard?
Awww, come on, Richie.

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority aka Robert Morein suffering from psychosis pretending
he is me, wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority, aka Robert Morein off his medication, who as usual,
doesn't know what he's ranting about, but drops by anyway with his
strawman, props it up, talks and argues with self, bores everyone to
death within a 50 mile radius:

Richard, I think you know the falsity of your assertion, which makes you
simply a shill. You're shilling for PWB Electronics.

Who's Richard?
Awww, come on, Richie.

Who's "Richie"?