[zybar]

Thats an important thing to consider before entering the hifi world. If she does...you can spend the money you want. 

Not necessary if you find the right spouse!

My wife hasn't spent 5 minutes listening to my system, yet she knows how much I enjoy it and that's enough for her.

God, I am a lucky man.   

George

[DanTheMan]

These words games grow old fast.  I'm assuming you fully agree with the author's choice of word and fully disagree with my point, which is fine.  IMO the word was intentionally inflammatory to get clicks to insure his income or a plain bad choice or possibly flat out dishonest on his part to prop up a point he does not fully agree to, but considering his PhD one would more likely assume the former or latter, not the middle choice.

I certainly have no issue with his wording, and I'd say you make no point that I can understand.  It's very clear.  I respect that.  I felt nothing when reading it.  I actually thought nothing more about it.  How will it get more hits on his blog and if it could and does that make it wrong?  For some reason it seems to have hurt your feelings as evidenced by you calling it inflammatory.  If you want to say why it bothers you, that may save some people from guessing and writing more irrational statements in response.  What difference does any of it make?  The research and conclusions are valid.  Big deal.  Don't argue what you think about the man unless you have proof of your position.  It's just logical fallacy.

Dan

[James Romeyn]

I certainly have no issue with his wording, and I'd say you make no point that I can understand.  It's very clear.  I respect that.  I felt nothing when reading it.  I actually thought nothing more about it.  How will it get more hits on his blog and if it could and does that make it wrong?  For some reason it seems to have hurt your feelings as evidenced by you calling it inflammatory.  If you want to say why it bothers you, that may save some people from guessing and writing more irrational statements in response.  What difference does any of it make?  The research and conclusions are valid.  Big deal.  Don't argue what you think about the man unless you have proof of your position.  It's just logical fallacy.

Dan

Why are you addressing nothing you understand?  Where is the alleged fraud (synonym for "dishonest") in sited speaker auditions?  I deleted and apologize for my supposed reasons for his bad choice of word (IMO).  It gets more hits because he alleged fraud, which is inflammatory and beyond a certain point is criminal (sometimes a low threshold).  Maybe you don't realize he collects money for the advertising on his site, often based on clicks. 

"It's difficult to make a man understand a point when it costs him money." 

[DanTheMan]

This has turned the silly corner.  If the above is to be considered an analogy for something included in the link I posted, I don't get it at all.  I detect something consistent with my original point about the PhD's choice of the word "dishonest", meaning that science-types get just as inflammatory as anyone saying $2k/ft cable will make you see god.  They're both similarly wrong and to be avoided.  I certainly think wires are way too costly in some  or many cases.  I've been around this for decades and the differences between too costly wires and the above analogy are below addressing.  The tendency of science types to see themselves as saviors of the unsuspecting public's money is some type of quasi-clinical savior complex.   

My analogy was in reference to the dishonesty statement.  My character did not believe he was dishonest even though he commits dishonesty.  Dishonesty doesn't necessarily imply intent.  In the blog, Dr Olive shows an expensive speaker of sound quality beneath its price that gets high ranking when viewed, and low ranking when just listened too.  I'm sorry, this seems completely obvious and it was intentionally silly as to keep this conversation from getting negative.  It's a friendly discussion after all. 

Your attempt to psychoanalyze is definitely unusual.  Now your trying to attack me or anyone who believes research has benefits.  You may want to take that up with you doctor as well.  It's just more logical fallacy.

Please try not to attack others.  Argue the facts.

Dan

[DanTheMan]

Why are you addressing nothing you understand?  Where is the alleged fraud (synonym for "dishonest") in sited speaker auditions?  I deleted and apologize for my supposed reasons for his bad choice of word (IMO).  It gets more hits because he alleged fraud, which is inflammatory and beyond a certain point is criminal (sometimes a low threshold).  Maybe you don't realize he collects money for the advertising on his site, often based on clicks. 

"It's difficult to make a man understand a point when it costs him money."

I do understand what he's saying.  You believing he implies fraud does not make it so.  I think he would have just said this speaker builder is committing fraud.  I try to read, not read into.  For everything said, there is something implied, but far be it from me to state that I know what that is.  It can be difficult even when you see and hear the person.  By just reading his writings it seems impossible to get what he or anyone else is implying.  I never thought he was saying that speaker builder that he doesn't reveal the name of was committing fraud.  Just that they are building a speaker that doesn't sound as good as another speaker that cost less even though it looks better and that swayed listeners impressions of it.  Even in my analogy I was not being fraudulent.  You said yourself that word games grow old fast.  Let's not continue them.  By throwing in synonyms, it seems like that is your intent, but it doesn't mean it is.

Dan

[DanTheMan]

Maybe you don't realize he collects money for the advertising on his site, often based on clicks. 

"It's difficult to make a man understand a point when it costs him money."

You think people go there b/c he says "dishonesty"?  Hmmmm.  I never would have thought of that.  See, to me that seems ridiculous.  I went there b/c of the research.   Even if it does bring more people to his site, it certainly doesn't make it wrong or bad.  The title of this thread could be inflammatory.  Let's attack that too then.  Just about anything can be inflammatory to anybody. 

[Nuance]

Your link above is below in quotes:

"One entry found for dishonesty.  Main Entry:   dis·hon·es·ty
 Pronunciation:   ()dis-än--st
 Function:   noun
 : lack of honesty  : the quality of being dishonest"

Forgive me, really, but I was under the impression, with all due respect to MW, that a definition including the word is generally to be avoided and inferior to one that does not include the word.  I personally deem the above to be quite inferior to the one below, which is more complete and finishes off the phrase above with my understanding on the same line and number for the definition:   


Below is unedited:
 dis·hon·es·ty   /dɪsˈɒnəsti/ [dis-on-uh-stee]       –noun,plural-ties. 1.lack  of honesty; a disposition to lie, cheat, or steal.  2.a  dishonest act; fraud.
 
These words games grow old fast.  The article was about blind speaker comparisons vs. sited.  Where/how does fraud accurately and correctly apply to sited speaker auditions?  I'm assuming you fully agree with the author's choice of word and fully disagree with my point, which is fine.  IMO the word was intentionally inflammatory to get clicks to insure his income or a plain bad choice or possibly flat out dishonest on his part to prop up a point he fully knows is weak. 

Think whatever you want dude; I don't care which definition you think was intended.  You're grasping at straws.

This (definition of words) is a really pointless debate, one I will bow out off. 

[doug s.]

Room acoustics plays a huge part in the sound.  Cheap gear in a great room will beat great gear in a cheap room.

this is likely about the most worthwhile piece of info in this thread, imo.  you go, nate!   

i used to have the luxury of having my rig in a 28x36x8.5 room.  the speakers were closest to the rear wall, ~6' away.  it was amazing how good almost any gear could sound in that room.  and, changes in gear were so easy to hear.  upgrading equipment & getting better sound was yust the icing on the cake.  the room is easily the most important part of any system, imo.  most all of us are fighting the room, regardless of what gear we possess.  my listening space isn't too bad, presently, at ~18x38.  but, it also serves as my complete residence, so listening area isn't optimized.  sure it sounds nice, (imo), but i always wonder - "how would these speakers sound in my old room"?  some day, i hope to find out, or hope to be able to enjoy a similar room in another location.  (three more years until my youngest is off to college; then i either buy the ex out and return to my old house, or we sell, split the proceeds, and i find another "permanent" residence, instead of the carriage house studio apartment where i have been living for the past three years.  yay!    )  the listening room has always been my #1 consideration whenever i was looking for a dwelling, since the time i moved out of my parent's residence.  now, a decent garage space is also an equal priority. 

regarding other "myths", it typically refers to "snake oil", and most often, folks argue about stuff like cabling.  my take on it is that cabling does make a difference, but if you are spending more than, say, $200 on a pair of interconnects, or, say, $20/foot for speaker wire, your money could be better-spent elsewhere.  some say i'm wrong, that more expensive, cabling is worth it; others say my dollar amounts are way too high.  so it goes...  i suggest one should simply be reasonable, and get the basics down before spending not insubstantial sums on stuff that's for the most part, "guilding the lily"...

and, while a component's appearance may affect some people's decisions regarding what they like, i feel fortunate to not be so afflicted.  (i think, haha!)  i know there have been instances where i wanted to like a certain component more than another, cuz it was so drop-dead gorgeous, but i preferred the "ugly duckling", because it sounded better.  two examples:  sherwood s3000-series tubed tuners vs mcintosh mr65b tubed tuner.  the mac is beautiful, the sherwoods sound quite a bit better.  cary slp98 preamp vs melos ma333r preamp.  the cary's looks are to die for, imo; the melos is a plain box.  the cary was put up f/s within a week of me getting the melos.   

ymmv,

doug s.

[DanTheMan]

Doug, no offense, but you amp is awesome looking to me.

Dan

[doug s.]

Doug, no offense, but you amp is awesome looking to me.

Dan

not sure which pic from my gallery you are looking at, but it's likely not the amp in the rig i am using at present.  i probably still have it, tho!   

and, re: looks of equipment, i was referring to preamps, not amps.  google cary slp-98 and melos ma333 and tell me which one is nice looking.   

doug s.

[doug s.]

melos ma333 - decent looking, but nothing to write home about:


cary slp-98 - a feast for the eyes:


doug s.

[toobluvr]

Hmmmm....
Purely on looks, I'd choose the one with the boobs......ummm, err.....toobs sticking outta the top!
        

[eclein]

Tubed beast looks cool to me!!

[doug s.]

Hmmmm....
Purely on looks, I'd choose the one with the boobs......ummm, err.....toobs sticking outta the top!
        

me, too,  but, the melos sounded so much better than the cary, it wasn't even a close contest.  the ears won!   

doug s.

[DanTheMan]

I like them both, but I'll take the Cary for looks hands down.

The Melos is cool like a tank or bulldozer.  The Cary makes me think Bugatti or something exotic and sexy.  Industrial vs. artsy.

Dan

[viggen]

4 pages and no debunking! 

"cheap" or "don't have to spend a lot of money" are relative terms, btw.

[DanTheMan]

Good point Viggen.  Let's debunk some crap.

#1)  there's no reason for super tweeters.
http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/83/6/3548

#2)  Anechoic response has nothing to do with what sounds good in the room.
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-3-relationship-between-loudspeaker.html

#3)  Going to the store and hearing the product is the most reliable way to purchase satisfaction.
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html

#4) The goal of stereo should be to recreate the live event.
http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html

#5) Capacitors can't make a difference.
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_caps.htm
But probably won't

#6) HiFi cables make an audible difference.
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm

#7) Power amps all sound the same.
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_pwr.htm

#8) speaker polarity matters.
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_pola.htm

Dan

[DanTheMan]

#9) loudspeaker phase distortions are audible while listening to music.
http://www.music.miami.edu/programs/mue/Research/dkoya/chapter_5/chapter_5.htm#5_1

Dan

[DanTheMan]

Jeez, I was hoping to come home to more debunking.

Anyone?

Dan

[lonewolfny42]

me, too,  but, the melos sounded so much better than the cary, it wasn't even a close contest.  the ears won!   

doug s.

doug...Didn't you also own the Mesa Baron....