[maxwalrath]

I'm perfectly willing to do the same kind of deal here, as I offered on the Isoclean fuse -

...did you ever do a test of the fuses?

[ScottMayo]

I'm perfectly willing to do the same kind of deal here, as I offered on the Isoclean fuse -

...did you ever do a test of the fuses?

Nope. No proponent of the fuses was interested in taking the wager. However, some people came charging out, claiming that testing itself was "invalid", and someone started to call me a "shill", on the apparent assumption that I must have been representing a competing manufacturer, but refused to admit it.

Well, I've since established my business, the web site is up, the manufacturers are listed, and the only manufacturer I represent in any way, shape or form is VMPS. (It's about to include NuForce amps.) I don't sell power cords, cables of any sort, fuses, quantum devices, or any tweaks of any kind. So I think it's safe to say I'm nobody's shill, and I don't stand to gain a dime on tweaks. Which leaves me free to be very unbiased about them. Nobody pays me for my opinions -  so nobody can shut me up.  

My vague hope is that over the years, wagers like this will lead to a few actual tests. If I'm very lucky, some test will reveal a tweak that works, and I'll spread the good news. If I'm not so lucky, testing will show that various tweaks do absolutely nothing, and all I'll gain is a reputation for someone who sells and espouses only the straight-up stuff that honestly and actually helps. Which isn't so bad. I might even save some people some money.

I figure it's a self-selecting system. If there's a tweak out there that really works, enough people will be convinced of it that someone will take one of my challanges, and then I'll learn something. Losing a wager like that is small dollars to pay for an education. And the tweaks that don't work, well, clearly no one's going to step up to the plate over one of those, right?  

[warnerwh]

I have a tweak that's only 250.00 dollars and will bet a 1,000.00 dollars cash I can tell the difference at least close to 100% of the time if not 100%, double blind standing on my head.  Not only that at minimum 80% of listeners will agree that the system sounds better with the tweak in than with it out of the system.

[ScottMayo]

I have a tweak that's only 250.00 dollars and will bet a 1,000.00 dollars cash I can tell the difference at least close to 100% of the time if not 100%, double blind standing on my head.  Not only that at minimum 80% of listeners will agree that the system sounds better with the tweak in than with it out of the system.

No bet here. In your case, if you say you have something, I'm likely to believe you.

Well, unless it's something "quantum".   Then we have to talk.  

[JohnR]

I figure it's a self-selecting system. If there's a tweak out there that really works, enough people will be convinced of it that someone will take one of my challanges, and then I'll learn something. Losing a wager like that is small dollars to pay for an education. icon_biggrin.gif And the tweaks that don't work, well, clearly no one's going to step up to the plate over one of those, right?

I don't get this bit. You seem to think that it's everybody else's responsibility to prove something to *you*.

[kfr01]

John:

I always thought it was the seller's responsibility and burden to sell me the product.

Some people let go of their money easier than others. Me, I don't buy products based solely on a challenge to "buy first, judge later" or flowery and poetic reviews.

I don't get your question.

[JohnR]

He's not talking about someone trying to sell him something, he's talking about someone who bought it having to convince him that it works.

Me, I don't buy products based solely on a challenge to "buy first, judge later" or flowery and poetic reviews.

Neither do I (any more), and in my own opinion the "reviews" of the IC are the last nail in the coffin of credibility for "professional" reviewers. But that doesn't mean that anyone who bought it has to prove to Scott Mayo that he (or they, you never know) are right.

[ScottMayo]

I don't get this bit. You seem to think that it's everybody else's responsibility to prove something to *you*.

Yup. Here's my take on this kind of thing.

If I buy a new component, and I get better sound from it, I'll try to work out if it's an improvement that only applies to my system ("hey, this acoustic trap helped my particular bass problem") OR, if it's something that could help almost anybody ("People, you need to hear the RM/x before you buy anything in the $10,000 plus range").

If it applies to my system only, I either won't write about it at all, or I'll write about it with big caveats ("This works for me. It solved my specific problem. You milage will probably vary - take it for what it's worth.")

But if I think it's a universal good, then I'll write about it and I'll say so. Anytime I write about something in that fashion, as far as my concerned, I'm putting my name on it. That's not something I do lightly, easily or often. (Ask my wife: my usual description of something I like is "it's ok". If I ever say anything is "great" or "fantastic", she comes running to see what marvelous, earth-shaking thing I've discovered.) If I say it's good, I'm promising that it is - and I'll be willing to prove it. You want to test my comments about the RM/x? I've got a pair right here in my showroom - the hours I'm open are on my website. Come see, no charge, bring your gear and listen all you want. If I wasn't absolutely convinced these are fantastic speakers I would never, ever do that.

I hold everybody else to the same standard. Especially manufacturers. You think your tweak is good? Then I expect a money back guarantee and a good long warranty, and for you to make it easy to test your claim. If you've got what you say you've got, my expectations won't hurt you. You said this thing works - make your claim verifiable without significant cost to the buyer, or get the hell out of business. Post the specifications, arrange free trials, get independent testers in to do a DBT, do whatever it takes to back up your claim in a verifiable fashion. When I want unverifiable claims and a string of untestable adjectives as long as my arm, I'll go buy shampoo.

So yes. Anyone who sits down and tries to tell me "X is good", takes on the burden of proof as far as I'm concerned. That's what happens when you write an opinion down for all to read. It becomes a claim. I'm from Missouri, in the spiritual sense. Show me. Or your credibility is zero in my book.

My belief is, Golden Sound ought to hand out IC's with 3 charges in them, for free, two to a customer. Know any audiophiles with only 6 disks? If it works, they will be flooded with business for the real product. If they can't do that, I'll take a money back guarantee in writing. At least some measurable, independently tested data on their site? Something? Any proof at all? No? Just some impossible pseudo-science? Yet another picture in the freezer?

Charalatans.

And I'll prove it, as long as they don't get a cent of my money in the process. (I'm not a charity for charalatans - and I don't support the "it's cheap, just buy one" approach because that just feeds the beast.)

We should ALL demand that people making claims of any sort, be willing to prove them, for free. And that applies to everything, from politics to pickles, and especially in audio.

Here's something I wrote years ago. It still holds true today:

http://users.net1plus.com/scottm/buying.htm

[skrivis]

You certainly did! And without ever having heard the thing.

I don't need to hear it to point out that it's hokum. The explanation they give makes no sense.

The Intelligent Chip is in the same category as Peter Belt's products, "Quantum Purifiers," Little Liver Pills, healing crystals, and the people who get "healed" by televangelists.

[JohnR]

Anyone who sits down and tries to tell me "X is good", takes on the burden of proof as far as I'm concerned. That's what happens when you write an opinion down for all to read. It becomes a claim. I'm from Missouri, in the spiritual sense. Show me. Or your credibility is zero in my book.

So every time you say "I think X is good" everyone else is entitled to demand that you prove it, using whatever measures or tests they deem appropriate?

[Marbles]

"People, you need to hear the RM/x before you buy anything in the $10,000 plus range"

...

Yes, before you know it, people will demand to see FR graphs of the speaker    

[ScottMayo]

Anyone who sits down and tries to tell me "X is good", takes on the burden of proof as far as I'm concerned. That's what happens when you write an opinion down for all to read. It becomes a claim. I'm from Missouri, in the spiritual sense. Show me. Or your credibility is zero in my book.

So every time you say "I think X is good" everyone else is entitled to demand that you prove it, using whatever measures or tests they deem appropriate?

We may have to compromise on the tests *I* deemed appropriate. But I will tell people what those tests were, and if they suggest that I perform some other verification that I can arrange for them... then, yes. (I draw the line at building anechoic rooms, though.) If I think it's good enough to sell or boast about, then either I or the manufacturer is on the hook to answer questions, prepare data and generally back up the claims of goodness. That's part of earning my slice of the price.

I'm not very worried about this, though. So far I've put my name to saying a total of *one* product is good, and that's the RM/x. I own it, I listen to it nightly, and except for a curious peak at around 2600Hz which I cannot for the life of me explain (or pick out with my ear - I wonder about my test meter), these speakers live up to claims as regards FR, imaging and output.

Of course, a claim of goodness for a speaker is often a pretty subjective thing. I listened to a lot of speakers (list available on request), made comparisons by ear and test meter, and made my choice. If that's not good enough for others - and it bloody well shouldn't be - then anyone interested can stop by and do any tests they like, and I encourage them to publish whatever they learn. (I wish I could arrange free, in home trials for people - but at 350# per speaker, shipping costs just don't allow it, and I have to ask local folk to come here, instead.)

But unusual claims require unusual proof, or so I was taught in Philosophy.  Our friend the IC, which defies all known science, requires significant proof that I don't otherwise demand of, um, lesser products. Hence the offer to do a DBT and all the rest. Because it's pretty obvious the manufacturer isn't going to.

[clarkjohnsen]

I don't get this bit. You seem to think that it's everybody else's responsibility to prove something to *you*.

Exactly and precisely! All over the Net -- Audio Asylum, Audiogon, HDVA -- there are guys like that. I don't get it. If I prove something to my own satisfaction and report that fact, why must I be constrained to prove it to others? Let them do their own work! I don't care what they think. Let them remain in blissful ignorance.

clark

[clarkjohnsen]

The "reviews" of the IC are the last nail in the coffin of credibility for "professional" reviewers.

Hmm... The real point of the IC controversy is that the "professional" reviewers haven't touched the thing -- they don't dare! It remains to the amateurs to speak that which the Industry and its Minions may not approach. To me, that gives the Chip greater credibility.

For myself, I never "reviewed" the Chip, only reported http://positive-feedback.com/Issue18/intelligentchip.htm the reactions I saw when people were confronted with it. Take that for what you will, but dozens of designers were able to hear the effect immediately; several were even willing to go on record.

clark

[clarkjohnsen]

Charalatans.

That's actionable. Methinks the limits have been o'erstepped.

clark

[ScottMayo]

Neither do I (any more), and in my own opinion the "reviews" of the IC are the last nail in the coffin of credibility for "professional" reviewers. But that doesn't mean that anyone who bought it has to prove to Scott Mayo that he (or they, you never know) are right.

Heh. As far as I'm concerned, folk like Soundideas owe us ALL a bit of proof - and a long, detailed explanation.

It's He, by the way, not They. I'm only royal-plural on my website, and that's only because my long-suffering wife is involved by fiat in this madness. The tax forms say "sole proprietor" and "0 employees", though.

Anyway, I don't want to overextend my demand. Folk who say "this hack worked for me on system X, Y, Z, and no I didn't double blind it" don't draw my ire (at least, unless they are claiming violations of all known physics, and they keep going on about it.) It's only when you get what looks like a troll or a salesman, making wild claims, that I start offering the wagers.

[clarkjohnsen]

You don't get any points by heaping scorn on a
person offering to do a test, you know.

Hmmm... And there I was, offering to do the test. And what did I get?
I got called a charlatan! Or anyway someone who consorts with
charlatans.

That's what I'm offering to do, try the frikkin' thing. Under
conditions that make "trying" unequivocally fair and honest.

You had your chance, sir. The Chip was in your hand to try. You
passed on it. I confess I was astonished at the evident lack of
curiosity.

It's funny how some people get ad hominem when you mention
real testing.

"Real testing." Interesting concept. To me, that would involve a
listening experience. To others, I guess it means... something
else. The experience I had in mind, that day, was trying it to see
what sort of difference a Chip made on that system. No
difference, no argument; sometimes that happens. What's the point
of getting all elaborate if no one from the get-go can discern it?

We'll use my RM/x - even if VMPS isn't your cup of tea.

Again with the misrepresentations! What is it with this guy?
For twenty-five years I've been a VMPS owner. I have not one, not
two, but three pairs in my house right now. At the top, FF-1s.
Geez Luiz!

No, what was not my cup of tea (and I was not going to get
into this, but after being called a charlatan... well...) was the
thin digital sound provided by Sony and Bryston electronics, a
distressing sound that was unameliorated by any of the usual fixes.
(I attribute that to the fact that it was so bad, one would need a
whole raft of fixes, not just one at a time, to evolve the system
to listenability.) Moreover these units were sitting firmly coupled
to that bitch earth and all her shaking, as well as in the presence
of video RF equipment. Nor were the cables encouraging.

Not only that, but a casual inspection behind the speakers revealed
one wire not just loose, but dangling by a few strands. While that
was being fixed, a wire on left channel was found loose, although
not dangling. Given this level of system maintenance, what hope had
one for discovery?

I guess the RM/Xs were good -- they look really swell! -- but
frankly my friend with RM-1s produces better sound. Sorry, Brian.

clark

[kfr01]

If I prove something to my own satisfaction and report that fact, why must I be constrained to prove it to others? Let them do their own work! I don't care what they think. Let them remain in blissful ignorance.

clark

Your crusade-like posting is evidence that you do, in fact, care what they think.

Charalatans.

That's actionable. Methinks the limits have been o'erstepped.

clark

You previously called us scalawags.  The lines were crossed on both sides.

[clarkjohnsen]

If I prove something to my own satisfaction and report that fact, why must I be constrained to prove it to others? Let them do their own work! I don't care what they think. Let them remain in blissful ignorance.

clark

Your crusade-like posting is evidence that you do, in fact, care what they think.

No, actually I care for them to listen. What they think, is up to them.

Charalatans.

That's actionable. Methinks the limits have been o'erstepped.

clark

You previously called us scalawags.  The lines were crossed on both sides.

Mere scalawaggery is not prosecutable under law, charlatanry is. That's why the latter accusation is actionable.

Besides, you and me both know, I was just writing, whereas Scott is seriously accusing.

Let it be said, however, that Mr. Kait is happy to bear the calumny so long as his name is spelled right.

clark

[skrivis]

I don't get this bit. You seem to think that it's everybody else's responsibility to prove something to *you*.

Exactly and precisely! All over the Net -- Audio Asylum, Audiogon, HDVA -- there are guys like that. I don't get it. If I prove something to my own satisfaction and report that fact, why must I be constrained to prove it to others? Let them do their own work! I don't care what they think. Let them remain in blissful ignorance.

clark

I don't care whether you prove it or not.

I'm sure that you _do_ hear a difference. I've never denied that. If the IC makes you happy, that's fine.

What I have problems with is the "explanation" of how it works. I just found that Machina Dynamica is only a dealer, so the explanation they provide may not be that of the manufacturer. However, the info given at dhcones.com does nothing to persuade me that these work.

Those Ultra Tweeters are pretty funny too. hehe

Magic Ring, anyone?

Is this place run by Harvey Rosenburg?