The audio mystics, agnostics and atheists thread

[Dimal]

Have to side with LD's reasoning and sentiments with this one....

Can understand where you're coming from though "aardvarkash10".

Mal.

[Hanuman]

... then it's possibly poor form to attempt to disabuse the poster of their belief that such things make a difference.

Is it really ?

Really, it is.

Is this denying someone's right to believe horse manure affects cable ? No.

Now that is debatable. It should be self-evident that one is entitled to one's own beliefs. That entitlement extends, I believe, to the right to harmlessly practice those beliefs without being subjected to unsolicited harassment for such and we are talking about truly harmless stuff here. In my hypothetical post, an insight into the belief of the poster is betrayed but because it's essentially irrelevant to the point of the post it shouldn't be open for debate. Were the post to have actively promoted the belief ahead of any other or otherwise discredited potentially opposing views then the threshold has been crossed and, obviously, the views are fair game for discussion. But just being aware of the existence of a certain disposition doesn't justify a response that challenges the underlying beliefs, at least not if the challenger doesn't want to be open to a charge of intolerance or, as I alluded to earlier, downright harassment.

The hypothetical case of the euphonic horse manure is an extreme one, because the premise appears to be so ludicrous, but there are many other hard-felt beliefs in this game that are far less controversial but, in essence, not that much different. What if I say that my Lyra Delos is superior to my DL-103R. A voice might say "Prove that".

I can't - it's unprovable.

[bauzace50]

Hi,

we had a horse and cow farm close to my town. There was a distinct scent coming from the cow manure when one travelled close to the farm around 6:00 am. The day was well set after whiffing on that nature's bounty. Good smelling, no kidding.
But I was a pre-audiophile boy then, with no recollections about sound.

My first unsupported notion, not sustained by corroboration: My belief that cartridges come out of the factory in optimum condition and need no "running in".

A second unsupported notion is that MCs have no intrinsic advantage over MMs, and the eventual performance of any model depends on the specific product, independent of motor principle. My previous resistance to MCs is softening while experiencing the performance of several MCs I have owned, or presently own. That is, I am growing comfortable with MCs but will NEVER part with MMs.

Third unsupported notion is that cables make no difference, be they interconnects, speaker cables, power cables, or headphone cables.

Fourth notion that was drastically revised: manual record cleaning is sufficient. Was I ever WRONG A good record washing machine is a huge improvement over manual brushes and rags.

So, discussing beliefs which are not corroborated is my way of understanding the premise of this thread.

Good luck,
bauzace50

[Ldg]

... then it's possibly poor form to attempt to disabuse the poster of their belief that such things make a difference.

Is it really ?

Really, it is.

I disagree. For example, if that belief leads to misleading others toward poor buying decisions, wasting money, etc. Obvious examples abound.

It should be self-evident that one is entitled to one's own beliefs. That entitlement extends, I believe, to the right to harmlessly practice those beliefs without being subjected to unsolicited harassment for such and we are talking about truly harmless stuff here.

Harassment is an emotive word, and would be typically in the mind of the harassee here. And, in any event, challenge is not harassment. Besides, belief is not harmless when it is used to mislead others toward loss or bad decisions.

In my hypothetical post, an insight into the belief of the poster is betrayed but because it's essentially irrelevant to the point of the post it shouldn't be open for debate.

I disagree. If a premise of the post is flawed, it is open for debate. Even if the premise is implied, such as discussion of what type of horse manure sounds best or whether cryogenically treating horse manure is worthwhile. It's always relevant that horse manure has no real effect.

Were the post to have actively promoted the belief ahead of any other or otherwise discredited potentially opposing views then the threshold has been crossed and, obviously, the views are fair game for discussion.

Again, such promotion is always implied in discussion such as what horse manure treatment sounds best.

The hypothetical case of the euphonic horse manure is an extreme one, because the premise appears to be so ludicrous, but there are many other hard-felt beliefs in this game that are far less controversial but, in essence, not that much different.

Precisely.

What if I say that my Lyra Delos is superior to my DL-103R. A voice might say "Prove that" ...

If ever called on it, at least you could verify they are different, which they truly are. You could record them and share the files. You could then have an interesting discussion about opinions and taste, and qualities. If you did the same thing with euphonic horse manure treated cables, I'd like to think the audio samples would be indistinguishable, and no sensible discussion based on them is possible.

[aardvarkash10]

There is a difference between being right and doing right.

I disagree. For example, if that belief leads to misleading others toward poor buying decisions, wasting money, etc. Obvious examples abound.

any reasonably competent and aware individual is able to question and do due diligence for themselves. The ultimate outcome of your defense of protecting the innocent is that you wander around the streets with a sharpie altering advertising copy as you go...

Harassment is an emotive word, and would be typically in the mind of the harassee here. And, in any event, challenge is not harassment. Besides, belief is not harmless when it is used to mislead others toward loss or bad decisions.

repeated challenge however could be seen as harassment, especially where that challenge has been commented on and refused. There comes a point where intellectual challenge becomes hectoring bullying... I am guilty of it myself from time to time in different settings. Mea Culpa.

I disagree. If a premise of the post is flawed, it is open for debate. Even if the premise is implied, such as discussion of what type of horse manure sounds best or whether cryogenically treating horse manure is worthwhile. It's always relevant that horse manure has no real effect.

IMO, its fair to point out that the premise is flawed. The action at that point should be to shift the analysis of why the premise is flawed to here. That way interested parties can follow and discuss, true believers can stay and pick navel lint. No one gets hurt, those who choose to be enlightened can be, those who choose horseshit can wallow.

Lets see if we can be AND do right.

[bauzace50]

@aardvardkash10,

your mention of "being right vs. doing right" rings a bell here. The attitude of "being right" despite not being so has potential for damage. "Doing right" is the right thing to do.

And with that, I withdraw to simpler consideratons.

Regards and best wishes,
b50

[Ldg]

......any reasonably competent and aware individual is able to question and do due diligence for themselves......

Unfortunately not typically. Plus horse manure treated cable marketeers offer great pseudo-scientic rhetoric by way of explanation as to how it works. Basically, enzymes in horse manure improve linearity of dielectrics at extremely small signal levels, by digesting free radicals. Audio stuff which has no real basis seldom lacks a pseudo-scientific explanation, just that explanation doesn't stand scrutiny.

The ultimate outcome of your defense of protecting the innocent is that you wander around the streets with a sharpie altering advertising copy as you go...

Personally, although I find it distasteful to see people misled, I'm in it here to protect content of my own posts, which I like to think don't embrace horse manure, and are devalued by those which are. What's the point of posting good, verifiable content then ? Plus, one of these days, under challenge someone might actually post an audio sample of a horse manure infused cable which rocks the boat by establishing a basis that it's real. A recent example was posted carefully recorded audio samples of a cartridge before and after burn-in, which pretty much settles agnostism on the issue, and now opens very interesting exploration of the mechanisms.

..repeated challenge however could be seen as harassment, especially where that challenge has been commented on and refused. There comes a point where intellectual challenge becomes hectoring bullying...

So, do you feel hectored here, aadvarkash10 ? I don't. We're are discussing this matter robustly hopefully to a point of conclusion. You disagree with my arguments and challenge them, I am challenging your fresh posts and what you suggest because I disagree. We point out why we disagree. I point out why I think what you're suggesting is harmful and a step backwards. If we were sensitive souls we might be uncomfortable with contradiction, but the alternative is happy pally diplomacy where everyone is right. Just I happen to think that's 2nd rate on a forum dedicated to optimising vinyl playback, where there are many horse manure products and ideas to sort from those which aren't.

IMO, its fair to point out that the premise is flawed. The action at that point should be to shift the analysis of why the premise is flawed to here. That way interested parties can follow and discuss, true believers can stay and pick navel lint. No one gets hurt, those who choose to be enlightened can be, those who choose horseshit can wallow.

For the reasons already posted, that would seriously devalue forum content and encourage unchallenged discussion of horse manure type issues. I for one have not much interest in posting content alongside that sort of unchallenged discussion, and if no-one can test the basis for my posts how will anyone know to trust if they also are correct ?

Besides, it would be partisan and biased to bar challenges to premises and subsequent discussion without also barring content which properly establishes a basis. You really want baseless threads without challenge and discussion about horse manure? No, it's a poor proposition which would degrade content. And no, it would not be 'right' to do this for the sake of protecting sensitivities of those who believe in and would advocate baseless effects, IMO.

[Hanuman]

Personally, although I find it distasteful to see people misled, I'm in it here to protect content of my own posts, which I like to think don't embrace horse manure, and are devalued by those which are.

So you just want to keep out the riff-raff and infidels, then?

LD, I'm more interested in this exchange further back in the thread:

What if I say that my Lyra Delos is superior to my DL-103R. A voice might say "Prove that" ...

If ever called on it, at least you could verify they are different, which they truly are. You could record them and share the files. You could then have an interesting discussion about opinions and taste, and qualities. If you did the same thing with euphonic horse manure treated cables, I'd like to think the audio samples would be indistinguishable, and no sensible discussion based on them is possible.

I often find that Monty Python can be relied upon for the analysis to virtually any situation. In this case I'll leave it to Michael Palin, as a peasant in the process of being repressed by King Arthur: "Ooh, what a giveaway!".

As a vocal advocate of the hazard posed by expectation bias you'd have to concede that your own bias (actually, almost complete prejudice) in this case, to which you've admitted, would certainly leave you at risk of missing any effect that (unexpectedly, to be sure) the manure treatment might actually have.

[Ldg]

So you just want to keep out the riff-raff and infidels, then?

No, you've got that completely wrong, Hamuman. I'm pro inclusion of challenges and discussion arising by all, and it's you suggesting censorship and restrictions on who might post what about the premise of a thread ! I'm saying such things are fair game for discussion, you're seeking to exclude them !

As a vocal advocate of the hazard posed by expectation bias you'd have to concede that your own bias (actually, almost complete prejudice) in this case, to which you've admitted, would certainly leave you at risk of missing any effect that (unexpectedly, to be sure) the manure treatment might actually have.

OK, so you get that expectation bias affects all of us and is a hazard, Hamuman. A huge one, I reckon. And, as always, I embrace my own bias, there's no trap here. I probably routinely do as many blind A/B tests, measurements and recordings as anyone here, and post the results to share. If you really think that treating cables with horse manure is likely to have an audible effect, I leave it to you to verify by doing exactly that. Knock your socks off, it's your claim, Hanuman, bizarre as it may be - go verify it ! But at least you're admitting the need to do so.

[Hanuman]

If you really think that treating cables with horse manure is likely to have an audible effect, I leave it to you to verify by doing exactly that. Knock your socks off, it's your claim, Hanuman, bizarre as it may be - go verify it !

Allow me to correct that misleading representation of my beliefs - I haven't made any claims regarding horse, or any other kind, of manure.

[Ldg]

...at risk of missing any effect that..(..)...the manure treatment might actually have.

You relied on it in a point of argument, Hanuman. That's as good as a claim in my book. If I was in your shoes I'd start a thread about what the best sort of horse manure is and where to obtain it at a good price

[Toynbee]

In order to properly assess the effects of materials in audio electronics, you need to use tube/valve amps. Solid state amps don't work in this case.

[jake]

Its nice that you guys have your own thread about horse manure.

[Hanuman]

...at risk of missing any effect that..(..)...the manure treatment might actually have.

You relied on it in a point of argument, Hanuman. That's as good as a claim in my book.

LD, you're very selective in what you choose to quote. In one of my earlier contributions I wrote this:

The hypothetical case of the euphonic horse manure is an extreme one, because the premise appears to be so ludicrous, ...

Maybe I could be accused of having a bet each way in the argument but nobody reading the whole thread should come out with the conclusion that I personally buy into the hypothetical manure treatment and it was that possible impression (a very low-level of defamation, I'll concede) that I sought to redress.

Returning to this one:

... and it's you suggesting censorship and restrictions on who might post what about the premise of a thread ! I'm saying such things are fair game for discussion, you're seeking to exclude them !

I don't accept this. Again, a reasonable reader of my post should not come to the view that I've advocated official censorship in any way. What I did write could be called an attempt to promote the virtues of diplomacy and restraint in the discourse and some might reasonably see that as self-censorship, a form of which most of us engage in, to some degree, in order to deal with everyday social interactions. I'm a long way from dangerous appeasement or thought-control here.