On 5/15/04 6:23 PM, in article , "Michael
Scarpitti" wrote:

(Nousaine) wrote in message
news:qs6pc.1072$qA.167000@attbi_s51...


Indeed I'm referencing the S&V 2004 Buyers Guide and the Cary Audio
transistor
amplifiers are all rated from 100 to 200 watts into 8 ohms while the tubed
models are rated at 15 to 50 watts.

If this were the case and the Urban Legend that "small" amplifiers are
dangerous to tweeters is also true ......then why aren't we seeing threads
about the awful problems that tubed owners are having with cooked tweeters
(and/or other drivers)?

Clipping behaviour of tubes and SS amps differs. Tubes clip in a
softer manner, which does not create the nasty waves that a clipping
transistor amp does.

Don't tubes tend to clip with even harmonics, and low order ones at that.
Not sure how that would affect a tweeter ... ?

Bromo wrote in message ...
On 5/13/04 3:06 PM, in article BGPoc.42335$z06.6207688@attbi_s01, "chung"
wrote:


You are not answering my question. You said that some things can never
be proven. My question was, and is, do you believe that we can ever
prove that magic green CD markers make a difference.

Sure you can! Next time you use them, you will be able to prove that they
make the edge of your CD turn GREEN!

Seriously, though, the right question would be WHAT KIND of difference would
they make, and how could one measure it?

From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever.

From: "Bob Marcus"
Date: 5/15/2004 12:39 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Bromo wrote:

On 5/14/04 12:15 PM, in article Lg6pc.377$gr.33538@attbi_s52, "S888Wheel"
wrote:

From: Bromo
Date: 5/13/2004 5:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: d2Uoc.43245$536.7593177@attbi_s03

On 5/12/04 11:04 PM, in article ,
" wrote:

You fail to mention two things, observation also is not the end step,

Yes, that's true - but I made no claims that it WAS the end step.



In science it is the first step. In audiophilia it is the first and last
steps.


Therein lies the difference between profession and HOBBY.

True. But you never hear birdwatchers rejecting the research findings of
biologists and claiming that their methodology hasn't been validated.

bob

_________________________________________________ ________________
Getting married? Find tips, tools and the latest trends at MSN Life Events.
http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=married






So birdwatching as a hobby is quite different than audiophilia as a hobby. So
what?

chung wrote in message ...


So it seems like you are extrapolating that to say that we can never
prove anything when it comes to audio, or anything in life for that matter.


Panzzi

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Regarding use of green pens:

"From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever."

To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

chung wrote in message ...


So it seems like you are extrapolating that to say that we can never
prove anything when it comes to audio, or anything in life for that matter.


Panzzi

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Only if you have trouble believing in the fact that transient signals
can be described in the frequency domain. In other words, testing with
sinosoids tells us how the equipment behaves with transient signals like
music. That's a fundamental prinicple of electrical engineering.

(Michael Scarpitti) wrote:

(Nousaine) wrote in message
news:qs6pc.1072$qA.167000@attbi_s51...


Indeed I'm referencing the S&V 2004 Buyers Guide and the Cary Audio
transistor
amplifiers are all rated from 100 to 200 watts into 8 ohms while the tubed
models are rated at 15 to 50 watts.

If this were the case and the Urban Legend that "small" amplifiers are
dangerous to tweeters is also true ......then why aren't we seeing threads
about the awful problems that tubed owners are having with cooked tweeters
(and/or other drivers)?

Clipping behaviour of tubes and SS amps differs. Tubes clip in a
softer manner, which does not create the nasty waves that a clipping
transistor amp does.

I've never before seen anyone qualify the idea that small amplifiers are
dangerous to speakers as to amplifier type. It seems the Urban Legend changes
depending on the day :-)

On 5/16/04 12:29 PM, in article , "chung"
wrote:

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Only if you have trouble believing in the fact that transient signals
can be described in the frequency domain. In other words, testing with
sinosoids tells us how the equipment behaves with transient signals like
music. That's a fundamental prinicple of electrical engineering.

If you do a taylor series, you are correct - but if you recall you circuit
analysis, you will know that analysis of circuit transients is a good way to
examine them - and while complicated - is important to understand the
frequency content of transients to help understand them - think about the
noide generated by a square pulse over a frequency spectrum -

Bromo wrote:
On 5/16/04 12:29 PM, in article , "chung"
wrote:

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Only if you have trouble believing in the fact that transient signals
can be described in the frequency domain. In other words, testing with
sinosoids tells us how the equipment behaves with transient signals like
music. That's a fundamental prinicple of electrical engineering.

If you do a taylor series, you are correct -

Uh, I was thinking of Fourier analysis...

but if you recall you circuit
analysis, you will know that analysis of circuit transients is a good way to
examine them - and while complicated - is important to understand the
frequency content of transients to help understand them - think about the
noide generated by a square pulse over a frequency spectrum -

Not sure what you are trying to get at. I was responding to someone's
claim that audio equipment cannot be measured or evaluated because of
the transient nature of sound. So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

On 5/16/04 6:58 PM, in article lmSpc.11421$gr.987287@attbi_s52, "chung"
wrote:

but if you recall you circuit
analysis, you will know that analysis of circuit transients is a good way to
examine them - and while complicated - is important to understand the
frequency content of transients to help understand them - think about the
noide generated by a square pulse over a frequency spectrum -

Not sure what you are trying to get at. I was responding to someone's
claim that audio equipment cannot be measured or evaluated because of
the transient nature of sound. So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

I agree with you - you can observe sound - transients, etc.

Subjective judgements (this sounds "good" or "bad") is left the the
audience, of course! :-)

I think you're right. I mean who doesn't want garden-hose thickness speaker
wire going from their super amp to their super speakers? Unfortunately, the
garden-hose thickness wire can cost as much as a good amp. Fortunately, I
have hit on a sensible and economical solution that provides esthetic chic,
excellent performance, and reasonable cost. I use 12 ga. speaker wire from
Lowe's and run it through a length of 1/2" garden hose. (I find the
braided-look green style works best.) Cost me about $10. Works great.
Thinking about contacting a garden hose company about having them make up a
run of the hose with a ground wire (oxygen free copper) running through it
and selling into the audiophile market.

I think if I price it high enough (not too high, though, I have some
scruples) and place some ads, those guys at STEREOPHILE will come through
with a favorable review.

What do you guys think?

--

- GRL

"It's good to want things."

Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist,
Visual Basic programmer)
"John Royer" wrote in message
...
I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects,
price
points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons
can
you lose etc.

I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the
"If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates.

Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these
various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons?

Aesthetics

Bragging rights

I mean we've spent all this money on beautiful looking amps, CD players,
speakers, racks, turntables and subs. How could we possibly hook it up
with
radio shack and lamp chord and call it a thing of beauty?

chung wrote in message ...
Michael Scarpitti wrote:

chung wrote in message ...


So it seems like you are extrapolating that to say that we can never
prove anything when it comes to audio, or anything in life for that matter.


Panzzi

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Only if you have trouble believing in the fact that transient signals
can be described in the frequency domain. In other words, testing with
sinosoids tells us how the equipment behaves with transient signals like
music. That's a fundamental prinicple of electrical engineering.

HUH? By 'transient' I mean that it goes away. An image stands still.

On 5/16/04 8:07 PM, in article , "GRL"
wrote:

I think you're right. I mean who doesn't want garden-hose thickness speaker
wire going from their super amp to their super speakers? Unfortunately, the
garden-hose thickness wire can cost as much as a good amp. Fortunately, I
have hit on a sensible and economical solution that provides esthetic chic,
excellent performance, and reasonable cost. I use 12 ga. speaker wire from
Lowe's and run it through a length of 1/2" garden hose. (I find the
braided-look green style works best.) Cost me about $10. Works great.
Thinking about contacting a garden hose company about having them make up a
run of the hose with a ground wire (oxygen free copper) running through it
and selling into the audiophile market.

I think if I price it high enough (not too high, though, I have some
scruples) and place some ads, those guys at STEREOPHILE will come through
with a favorable review.

What do you guys think?

Sounds like a good busness plan - good luck to you.

I think a lot of the interconnect malarchy has a lot to do with the
speakers, length of wire and the output impedance of the amplifiers in
question. I have spent countless hours in the lab designing RF amplifiers
changing impedances by 0.5 Ohms or less and seeing a fairly substantial
change in output power, gain or so on. And while Audio amplifiers are
supposed to be more robist to this sort of tweaking - the loads are entirely
arbitrary (speaker + cable) and I do wonder if there couldn't be an effect.

Perhaps if you are open minded, you could get 3 of those zip cords, braid
them and take 3 hot leads and 3 grounds and see if you can sense any
difference on a recording you understand. Though if your speakers are not
good, it won't matter.

wrote in message ...
Regarding use of green pens:

"From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever."

To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

chung wrote in message news:lmSpc.11421$gr.987287@attbi_s52...

but if you recall you circuit
analysis, you will know that analysis of circuit transients is a good way to
examine them - and while complicated - is important to understand the
frequency content of transients to help understand them - think about the
noide generated by a square pulse over a frequency spectrum -

Not sure what you are trying to get at. I was responding to someone's
claim that audio equipment cannot be measured or evaluated because of
the transient nature of sound. So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

This has nothing to do with 'transients'. It has to do with the
transitory nature of sound.

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
chung wrote in message ...
Michael Scarpitti wrote:

chung wrote in message ...


So it seems like you are extrapolating that to say that we can never
prove anything when it comes to audio, or anything in life for that matter.


Panzzi

The problem with sound is that it is transient in nature. Lens testing
is much easier, because the image can be captured on film and viewed
at leisure, and more than one image can be viewed at once. With audio,
this is impossible.

Only if you have trouble believing in the fact that transient signals
can be described in the frequency domain. In other words, testing with
sinosoids tells us how the equipment behaves with transient signals like
music. That's a fundamental prinicple of electrical engineering.

HUH? By 'transient' I mean that it goes away. An image stands still.


How the system responds to the transient signal can be predicted by
frequency domain measurements. Audio equipment can be reliably
characterized by frequency domain (as well as time domain) measurements.
The fact that music is the signal does not make the equipment hard to
analyze. Equipment that respond identically in the freqeuncy domain and
time domain will respond the same to transient inputs (with a few
pathological exceptions). The known principles of EE apply extremely
well in audio.

If you think about it, any information is of transient nature; there is
no information conveyed in steady state signals. We routiningly are
designing equipment handling Gigahertz's of bandwidth, so why would
audio be difficult to test, especially when it comes to cables or
whether the green marker pen makes any difference?

On 15 May 2004 22:23:05 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

(Nousaine) wrote in message news:qs6pc.1072$qA.167000@attbi_s51...


Indeed I'm referencing the S&V 2004 Buyers Guide and the Cary Audio transistor
amplifiers are all rated from 100 to 200 watts into 8 ohms while the tubed
models are rated at 15 to 50 watts.

If this were the case and the Urban Legend that "small" amplifiers are
dangerous to tweeters is also true ......then why aren't we seeing threads
about the awful problems that tubed owners are having with cooked tweeters
(and/or other drivers)?

Clipping behaviour of tubes and SS amps differs. Tubes clip in a
softer manner, which does not create the nasty waves that a clipping
transistor amp does.

Untrue. Top-class tube amps such as the ARC VT-150 or C-J Premier
Eight clip in exactly the same way that SS amps do, and for the same
reasons.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On 17 May 2004 03:19:13 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

wrote in message ...
Regarding use of green pens:

"From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever."

To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...
On 17 May 2004 03:19:13 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

wrote in message ...
Regarding use of green pens:

"From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever."

To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

You must understand I am as skeptical as you, perhaps more so. That
does not diminish my ability to hear, however.

S888Wheel wrote:
From: "Bob Marcus"
Date: 5/15/2004 12:39 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Bromo wrote:

On 5/14/04 12:15 PM, in article Lg6pc.377$gr.33538@attbi_s52, "S888Wheel"
wrote:

From: Bromo
Date: 5/13/2004 5:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: d2Uoc.43245$536.7593177@attbi_s03

On 5/12/04 11:04 PM, in article ,
" wrote:

You fail to mention two things, observation also is not the end step,

Yes, that's true - but I made no claims that it WAS the end step.



In science it is the first step. In audiophilia it is the first and last
steps.


Therein lies the difference between profession and HOBBY.

True. But you never hear birdwatchers rejecting the research findings of
biologists and claiming that their methodology hasn't been validated.

bob

_________________________________________________ ________________
Getting married? Find tips, tools and the latest trends at MSN Life Events.
http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=married






So birdwatching as a hobby is quite different than audiophilia as a hobby. So
what?

So, imagine a hobby where the *trappings* of science were entertained, with bench reports, technical
jargon, and such, but the methods of science are considered suspect if not wholly inappropriate. And
where the 'hobbyists' seem *never* to be content with the idea that a perceived difference
might be 'all in their heads' and have no physical basis, even though they are willing to claim that
'it's just a hobby' when challenged.

--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Bromo wrote:
On 5/13/04 3:06 PM, in article BGPoc.42335$z06.6207688@attbi_s01, "chung"
wrote:


You are not answering my question. You said that some things can never
be proven. My question was, and is, do you believe that we can ever
prove that magic green CD markers make a difference.

Sure you can! Next time you use them, you will be able to prove that they
make the edge of your CD turn GREEN!

Seriously, though, the right question would be WHAT KIND of difference would
they make, and how could one measure it?

The right quesiton is , what sort of evidence would you accept as
proof that green makers do NOT make an audible difference?

--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

chung wrote in message news:lmSpc.11421$gr.987287@attbi_s52...

but if you recall you circuit
analysis, you will know that analysis of circuit transients is a good way to
examine them - and while complicated - is important to understand the
frequency content of transients to help understand them - think about the
noide generated by a square pulse over a frequency spectrum -

Not sure what you are trying to get at. I was responding to someone's
claim that audio equipment cannot be measured or evaluated because of
the transient nature of sound. So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

This has nothing to do with 'transients'. It has to do with the
transitory nature of sound.


Wasn't that what I said?

" To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception
knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed
less hi
ss."

Then this would argue strongly for the source being a product of the
perception process, where discrimination of the signal into music and
noise happens, another example now familiar in other parts of audio
perception imposing something onto the signal after it reaches the ears.

Bromo wrote:
On 5/11/04 11:39 PM, in article , "Steven
Sullivan" wrote:

I am a believer! A believer of not all things (indeed, very little
things)can be proved by present so called science. But we still live in
this world.

If you don't believe what 'so called science' has to say, on what
basis do you believe what you believe?

Perhaps he is talking about an unhappiness with the current state of the
art? There are also a lot of individuals who claim to be scientific types
that reject observation out of hand and call into question the people that
report those observations.

I know of no scientists who reject observation out of hand...indeed, tha
vast majority of them depend on observation in their work.

What they *reject* is that an observation msut mean what the
observer says it means, simply by virtue of it having been asserted.
They require some supporting evidence (which usually includes other
observations).

I would point out, that both the sate of the art and rejecting observations
out of hand are NOT science or the scientific method - but human reaction.

An 'observation' of perpetual motion would be rejected 'out of hand', quite rightly
so, because of all the evidence so far points to it being an impossibility.
The 'observer' is therefore obliged to supply *compelling evidence* that his
observation is what he claims.

Science *routinely* discards unlikely hypotheses; there is not time enough in the world to
entertain all of them equally. Nor is there reason to. The key thing is that
the process is *open* to admitting unlikely claims, so long as the evidence
is presented for them. THAT is the burden on the claimant, not the
audience.




--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of. Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

On 5/17/04 11:51 AM, in article vc5qc.68154$z06.9029346@attbi_s01, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

Untrue. Top-class tube amps such as the ARC VT-150 or C-J Premier
Eight clip in exactly the same way that SS amps do, and for the same
reasons.

What are the harmonic products from compression distortion? I would wager
that tubes tend to produce more lower order harmonics and have more second
order harmonics - while solid state tend to compress more crisply leaving a
lot of higher order harmonics and a larger odd order harmonics.

They both compress, yes, but what they do as they compress is a bit
different - but given that one device is a thermo-ionic device and the other
is a semiconductor - it stands to reason.

On 5/17/04 7:02 PM, in article , "Michael
Scarpitti" wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message
news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less
hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of. Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

A broad interpretation of Quantum physics would say that when you are not
looking it is all a mass of probability. The tennis ball was everywhere at
once, all at once!

In article IWbqc.25561$6f5.2543404@attbi_s54,
Bromo wrote:
On 5/17/04 11:51 AM, in article vc5qc.68154$z06.9029346@attbi_s01, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

Untrue. Top-class tube amps such as the ARC VT-150 or C-J Premier
Eight clip in exactly the same way that SS amps do, and for the same
reasons.

What are the harmonic products from compression distortion? I would wager
that tubes tend to produce more lower order harmonics and have more second
order harmonics - while solid state tend to compress more crisply leaving a
lot of higher order harmonics and a larger odd order harmonics.

They both compress, yes, but what they do as they compress is a bit
different - but given that one device is a thermo-ionic device and the other
is a semiconductor - it stands to reason.

It's been a long time, but I spent some time looking at the output from
a variety of tube and solid-state amps driving dummy loads driven into
clipping.The good amps either solid-state or vacuum tube clipped the same
way - no error until the output hit the power supply rail, stayed at the
rail until the output dropped below the rail, and then smoothly continued.
I'll admit I did not have the facilities for doing a spectral analysis, but
looking at the leading and trailing edge of a 1 to 10Khz sine wave on the
output with a Tek 555 showed nothing obvious. (Oscillator was a Heath
IG-18 modified a la Morrey, if you remember those).

A Dyna Stereo 120, however, had a lot of spurious output from the time
that the output hit the rail and after the output had started to come down.
This was all much higher in frequency than the input signal, and not
obviously related in frequency to the driving signal.

I don't remember looking at tube designs with weak power supplies; those
were pretty rare by 1975, since the only real market for tube equipment at
that time was the high end.

Mike Squires
--

Mike Squires (mikes at cs.indiana.edu) 317 233 9456 (w) 812 333 6564 (h)
mikes at siralan.org 546 N Park Ridge Rd., Bloomington, IN 47408

On Mon, 17 May 2004 23:30:48 GMT, Bromo wrote:

On 5/17/04 11:51 AM, in article vc5qc.68154$z06.9029346@attbi_s01, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

Untrue. Top-class tube amps such as the ARC VT-150 or C-J Premier
Eight clip in exactly the same way that SS amps do, and for the same
reasons.

What are the harmonic products from compression distortion?

Largely odd-order.

I would wager
that tubes tend to produce more lower order harmonics and have more second
order harmonics

Well, you would lose in the case of the amps mentioned above. I
thought you said you were an EE? A push-pull FET amp and a push-pull
tube amp of similar rated full-power distortion will have essentially
identical distortion spectra.

- while solid state tend to compress more crisply leaving a
lot of higher order harmonics and a larger odd order harmonics.

They both compress, yes, but what they do as they compress is a bit
different - but given that one device is a thermo-ionic device and the other
is a semiconductor - it stands to reason.

No, it doesn't. Go read some basic texts on the characteristics of the
active devices - and how they are modified by use in high-feedback
(i.e. low distortion) amplifiers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 17 May 2004 22:45:45 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...
On 17 May 2004 03:19:13 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

wrote in message ...
Regarding use of green pens:

"From my own personal observation, it first depends on the make and
model of CD player. On some discs recorded with analogue tape, there
was a slight reduction in his. On others, there was no effect
whatsoever."

To any cd "hiss" is just part of the signal, only human perception knows
it isn't, how does the use of the pen teach the cd to descriminate and
then eleminate some part of the signal?

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

You must understand I am as skeptical as you, perhaps more so. That
does not diminish my ability to hear, however.

What diminishes your ability to hear, is your refusal to incorporate
simple bias controls.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On 17 May 2004 23:02:47 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of.

I am very well aware of how CDs are read, and green pens are simply
not capable of affecting this. This ain't rocket science!

Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

No, not any more than when you 'hear'a reduction in hiss on a disc
that you *know* has been treeated, that there is actually a real
difference in the soundfield.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On 18 May 2004 01:24:52 GMT, Bromo wrote:

On 5/17/04 7:02 PM, in article , "Michael
Scarpitti" wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message
news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less
hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of. Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

A broad interpretation of Quantum physics would say that when you are not
looking it is all a mass of probability. The tennis ball was everywhere at
once, all at once!

On the subatmic level, it certainly was. Of course, that would make
much less than an Angstrom's difference in its gross position,
probably closer than even Mr Scarpitti can call..................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Bromo wrote in message ...
On 5/17/04 7:02 PM, in article , "Michael
Scarpitti" wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message
news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less
hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of. Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

A broad interpretation of Quantum physics would say that when you are not
looking it is all a mass of probability. The tennis ball was everywhere at
once, all at once!

The motion of tennis balls is not affected by quantum physics, but
Newtonian. Perhaps more accurately, they are the same for all
practical purposes on the scale of a tennis ball.

From: Steven Sullivan
Date: 5/17/2004 3:46 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: Xgbqc.15165$gr.1357683@attbi_s52

S888Wheel wrote:
From: "Bob Marcus"
Date: 5/15/2004 12:39 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Bromo wrote:

On 5/14/04 12:15 PM, in article Lg6pc.377$gr.33538@attbi_s52, "S888Wheel"
wrote:

From: Bromo
Date: 5/13/2004 5:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: d2Uoc.43245$536.7593177@attbi_s03

On 5/12/04 11:04 PM, in article ,
" wrote:

You fail to mention two things, observation also is not the end
step,

Yes, that's true - but I made no claims that it WAS the end step.



In science it is the first step. In audiophilia it is the first and
last
steps.


Therein lies the difference between profession and HOBBY.

True. But you never hear birdwatchers rejecting the research findings of
biologists and claiming that their methodology hasn't been validated.

bob

_________________________________________________ ________________
Getting married? Find tips, tools and the latest trends at MSN Life
Events.
http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=married






So birdwatching as a hobby is quite different than audiophilia as a hobby.
So
what?

So, imagine a hobby where the *trappings* of science were entertained, with
bench reports, technical
jargon, and such, but the methods of science are considered suspect if not
wholly inappropriate. And
where the 'hobbyists' seem *never* to be content with the idea that a
perceived difference
might be 'all in their heads' and have no physical basis, even though they
are willing to claim that
'it's just a hobby' when challenged.


It seems it has already been *imagined* on RAHE. Imagine a hobby where there
are are a multitude of beliefs and shades of grey.
--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:5hbqc.16235$qA.2006344@attbi_s51...
Bromo wrote:
On 5/13/04 3:06 PM, in article BGPoc.42335$z06.6207688@attbi_s01, "chung"
wrote:


You are not answering my question. You said that some things can never
be proven. My question was, and is, do you believe that we can ever
prove that magic green CD markers make a difference.

Sure you can! Next time you use them, you will be able to prove that they
make the edge of your CD turn GREEN!

Seriously, though, the right question would be WHAT KIND of difference would
they make, and how could one measure it?

The right quesiton is , what sort of evidence would you accept as
proof that green makers do NOT make an audible difference?


Oscilloscope traces of pre- and post-treated discs.

S888Wheel wrote:
From: Steven Sullivan
So, imagine a hobby where the *trappings* of science were entertained, with
bench reports, technical
jargon, and such, but the methods of science are considered suspect if not
wholly inappropriate. And
where the 'hobbyists' seem *never* to be content with the idea that a
perceived difference
might be 'all in their heads' and have no physical basis, even though they
are willing to claim that
'it's just a hobby' when challenged.


It seems it has already been *imagined* on RAHE.

What part of my 'imagining' above does not actually accord with the
audiophile hobby, Scott?

Imagine a hobby where there
are are a multitude of beliefs and shades of grey.

OK: astrology.

Oddly enough, it, too, appropriates the scientific obsession with
measurement and technical jargon, but almost completely
sidesteps the essence of scientific observation.



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Jwqqc.21372$qA.2422963@attbi_s51...
On 17 May 2004 23:02:47 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of.

I am very well aware of how CDs are read, and green pens are simply
not capable of affecting this. This ain't rocket science!

No, it's optical science. Light moves in strange ways. At the very
small size of red wavelengths, there are certainly possibilities that
you know nothing about.

Does that mean when I turn around whyen my
opponent strikes the tennis ball, and I don't see it bounce, that it
does not go in?

No, not any more than when you 'hear'a reduction in hiss on a disc
that you *know* has been treeated, that there is actually a real
difference in the soundfield.

From: Steven Sullivan
Date: 5/18/2004 4:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel wrote:
From: Steven Sullivan
So, imagine a hobby where the *trappings* of science were entertained,
with
bench reports, technical
jargon, and such, but the methods of science are considered suspect if not
wholly inappropriate. And
where the 'hobbyists' seem *never* to be content with the idea that a
perceived difference
might be 'all in their heads' and have no physical basis, even though they
are willing to claim that
'it's just a hobby' when challenged.


It seems it has already been *imagined* on RAHE.

What part of my 'imagining' above does not actually accord with the
audiophile hobby, Scott?

This part. "*never*"


Imagine a hobby where there
are are a multitude of beliefs and shades of grey.

OK: astrology.

I was thinking of audio. I guess the shades of grey part tends to throw some
people.


Oddly enough, it, too, appropriates the scientific obsession with
measurement and technical jargon, but almost completely
sidesteps the essence of scientific observation.



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

On 5/18/04 2:15 PM, in article 5psqc.1525$zw.744@attbi_s01, "S888Wheel"
wrote:

It seems it has already been *imagined* on RAHE. Imagine a hobby where there
are are a multitude of beliefs and shades of grey.

How about ............ Automobile restoring and tweaking.....?

On 18 May 2004 23:28:42 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Jwqqc.21372$qA.2422963@attbi_s51...
On 17 May 2004 23:02:47 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:Hc5qc.68156$z06.9029126@attbi_s01...

I have no idea. All I know is that I am CERTAIN that SOME CD's revealed less hiss.

Your certainty is noted - indeed it is becoming legendary! OTOH, there
is no possible mechanism by which this can have occurred in the real
physical world.

That you are aware of.

I am very well aware of how CDs are read, and green pens are simply
not capable of affecting this. This ain't rocket science!

No, it's optical science. Light moves in strange ways.

No, it moves in *extremely* predictable ways, nothing at all strange
about it. Indeed, much of Einsteinian physics is based on very precise
observations of light doing highly predictable things.

At the very
small size of red wavelengths, there are certainly possibilities that
you know nothing about.

Firstly, a CD replay laser is not red, it's in the near infra-red.
Secondly, these are very *long* light wavelengths, 780 nanometres to
be exact, and there are no 'possibilities' involved here, just a
simple matter of phase detection by 1/4 wavelength pit depth
variation. This is a tried and tested principle which is used
precisely *because* it is not subject to problems caused by variations
in light amplitude or scatter. In fact, the reflected light from the
edge of the disc would have to be *at least* 30% of the amplitude of
the incident beam to have any effect, and that is clearly well beyond
possibility, since it's doubtful if total scatter from all sources
comes even to 1%, never mind what tiny fraction of a percent could
find its way to the edge of the disc and back.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering