Cable Challenge: Yamamura 5000
apribadi
Hi guys. This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest is driving
me nuts. Well, I've finally decided to go with used cables, if I don't like
it, I can sell it again at little cost.
What do you think about the Yamamura Millennium 5000 cables? I am looking
at their single-ended interconnects and speaker cables.
Thanks a lot!
Gene Steinberg
In article <01bd9c4f$c03fd480$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi" <apri...@pdq.net> wrote:
> This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest is driving
>me nuts.
Give it up and don't fall for that snake oil nonsense that cables make a
big difference (or any audible difference in most situations).
Unless your system is particularly demanding in some fashion (and most
aren't), a good set of cheap cables will provide no sacrifice over the
expensive brands, and will put more money in your pocket for some good
recordings.
Peace,
Gene
George M. Middius
Gene Steinborg rewinds to the all-cables-sound-the-same
segment.
>>This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest
>>is driving me nuts.
>Give it up and don't fall for that snake oil nonsense that cables make a
>big difference (or any audible difference in most situations).
Don't fall for this antihumanistic propaganda. Judge
for yourself. If you think you hear a difference, maybe
you do.
>Unless your system is particularly demanding in some fashion
>(and most aren't), a good set of cheap cables will provide no
>sacrifice over the expensive brands, and will put more money
>in your pocket for some good recordings.
See how They think? "... and most aren't". What a
snotty way to try to "help." Just disregard the
Steinborg's wet-blanket spew -- it's totally worthless.
You can pay as little as $5 per meter for an
interconnect, all the way up to thousands of dollars.
Very, very few people can justify the price of the
ultra-high-end stuff, and their reasons have nothing to
do with audible differences.
The biggest differences are to be found between the
most basic, barely functional cables and the ones that
are a couple of rungs up the ladder. Often the
composition and construction of a $30-per-meter cable
can yield audible differences (but not always -- the
components in your system must deliver high enough
resolution for subtle differences to be audible). What
you get by paying more than $5 is better construction,
better termination, better sheathing, and better
contact.
Your idea about buying premium-grade on the used market
is sensible and practical. No doubt that's why the
Steinborg snipped it. The Steinborg is not interested
in giving or receiving practical advice; it is an
ideologue, possibly in the pay of the mass-market
manufacturers who have a vested interest in
discrediting perceived audible differences.
My practical advice is to experiment with used cables
as you suggested. An alternative is making your own
cables. (I don't do this myself.) A third alternative
is to buy generic cables that are made from the same
components as the high-end ones. Try www.markertek.com
as one source.
George M. Middius
Remove "jiffy" to reply
Mike Wolfe
Hello Apribadi,
I highly recommend the 5000's. A year ago I received a great deal on
Synergistic Research Designer's Reference so I switched, otherwise I would
still be using them.
Regards,
Mike Wolfe
Steve Zipser
apribadi wrote:
>
> Hi guys. This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest is driving
> me nuts. Well, I've finally decided to go with used cables, if I don't like
> it, I can sell it again at little cost.
>
> What do you think about the Yamamura Millennium 5000 cables? I am looking
> at their single-ended interconnects and speaker cables.
>
> Thanks a lot!
These are good cables, I'm sure. Buy 'em cheap or locally where you can
try them out first if possible.
HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
To those who are not sure what to do about cables in your audio system,
here is SOUND ADVICE!
There are some droids here on r.a.o, who are convinced that wires make
no difference at all like Ostriches with their heads buried in the sand,
and there are some tweakos who believe in water filled jacketed, 30
pound aluminum block Terminator cables and the like as they dance and
prance and howl at the moon.
The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
audiophiles would have you believe.
I presume there are some quality dealers in your area, why don't you
visit some of them that you are comfortable with and arrange to borrow
a set or two and listen for yourself.
Your ears are the final arbiter, not some magazine reviewer and not some
computer geek with an abx box and not some maniac that claims wires are
more important than the room acoustics or speakers!
Check out Straightwire, Cardas, Monster Cable, Audioquest, those are all
good brands.
--
Sunshine Stereo, Inc http://www.sunshinestereo.com
Tel: 305-757-9358 Fax: 305-757-1367
9535 Biscayne Blvd Miami Shores FL 33138
PASS Labs NOVA Acoustics Miranda CODA Audible Illusions CEC
Camelot Technology Audio Logic Parasound Kinergetics Cabasse
Chiro Benz Micro Gallo Acoustics Dunlavy Audio NEAR NHT Jadis
Niles Zenith INTEQ Crystal Vision Straightwire Mordaunt Short ESP
Rega Vans Ever's Cleanlines Monster Cable ENTECH EAD Arcane Audio
Sunshine Stereo encourages all audiophiles to support their local
dealers. If you do not have a local dealer, we will gladly assist
you with all your audio and video needs! *** ENJOY THE MUSIC! ***
Steve Zipser
HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
To those who are not sure what to do about cables in your audio system,
here is SOUND ADVICE!
There are some droids here on r.a.o, who are convinced that wires make
no difference at all like Ostriches with their heads buried in the sand,
and there are some tweakos who believe in water filled jacketed, 30
pound aluminum block Terminator cables and the like as they dance and
prance and howl at the moon.
The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
audiophiles would have you believe.
I presume there are some quality dealers in your area, why don't you
visit some of them that you are comfortable with and arrange to borrow
a set or two and listen for yourself.
Your ears are the final arbiter, not some magazine reviewer and not some
computer geek with an abx box and not some maniac that claims wires are
more important than the room acoustics or speakers!
Check out Straightwire, Cardas, Monster Cable, Audioquest, those are all
good brands.
Gene Steinberg wrote:
>
> In article <01bd9c4f$c03fd480$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi" <apri...@pdq.net> wrote:
>
> > This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest is driving
> >me nuts.
>
> Give it up and don't fall for that snake oil nonsense that cables make a
> big difference (or any audible difference in most situations).
>
> Unless your system is particularly demanding in some fashion (and most
> aren't), a good set of cheap cables will provide no sacrifice over the
> expensive brands, and will put more money in your pocket for some good
> recordings.
>
> Peace,
> Gene
Leonard Weldon
Those who have questions about wires are advised to use this bit
of sage advice as the gospel...it rings with a timeless truth.
Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
there is "no difference". Let that same light burn when you
are approached with the $6,000 Super-Dooper-WATERWIRE
special...Moderation is the word...there is something decent
in the middle.
Leonard...
___________________________________________________
:
:HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
Gene Steinberg
>HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
SPAM alert! This is the 400th time Zip has posted this same unproven drivel!
Gene Steinberg
>HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
Don't listen to Zip's 400th posting of the same unproven drivel.
Gene Steinberg
In article <358cf473...@news2.ibm.net>, len...@ibm.net (Leonard
Weldon) wrote:
>Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
>
>Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
>there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
>cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
>there is "no difference". Let that same light burn when you
>are approached with the $6,000 Super-Dooper-WATERWIRE
>special...Moderation is the word...there is something decent
>in the middle.
False. The only sham here is in the claim of some folks that pricey cable
sounds better than cheap cable. That remains unproven.
There is no sham perpetrated by anyone who has gone to the mat and done
tests to see what's real and what isn't.
Leonard Weldon
On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:59:58 -0700, gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene
Steinberg) wrote:
:In article <358cf473...@news2.ibm.net>, len...@ibm.net (Leonard
:Weldon) wrote:
:
:>Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
:>
:>Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
:>there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
:>cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
:>there is "no difference".
___________________________________________________________
This "trolling" by zip has produced results, albeit, one that has been
thrown back in hundreds of time.
Note this individual has insight into what is real and what isn't.
You, on the other hand , are rather foolish to take a cable home and
try it out in your audio confines and decide what is best under your
audio conditions...be wary of those that have all the answers...for
you! This individual fits under the "...all is the same.." category...
Sham light on!
:There is no sham perpetrated by anyone who has gone to the mat and done
:tests to see what's real and what isn't.
: Peace, Gene
Todd Krieger
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust10.tnt9.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
>
> In article <6mglim$3...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com wrote:
>
> >HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
>
>
Todd Krieger
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Brian L. McCarty
> Those who have questions about wires are advised to use this bit of
> sage advice as the gospel...it rings with a timeless truth.
>
Zippo posts this diatribe about once a week. . .in fact, twice today alone.
It's the first thing he ever wrote on his computer.
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust10.tnt9.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <6mglj8$3...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
z...@sunshinestereo.com wrote:
>
> >HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
>
> Don't listen to Zip's 400th posting of the same unproven drivel.
HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
Don't listen to Gene's 400th posting of the same unproven drivel.
There are differences in cable sound, and quality as well. My advice
is to borrow the cables and listen, and compare them to what you have.
Don't allow this downer-putz to pour cold water on your hobby. Tell
him to go back off in his own jack yard.
--
If men evolved from monkeys and apes, why are there still monkeys and apes?
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust68.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <01bd9c4f$c03fd480$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi"
<apri...@pdq.net> wrote:
>
> > This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest is driving
> >me nuts.
>
> Give it up and don't fall for that snake oil nonsense that cables make a
> big difference (or any audible difference in most situations).
>
> Unless your system is particularly demanding in some fashion (and most
> aren't), a good set of cheap cables will provide no sacrifice over the
> expensive brands, and will put more money in your pocket for some good
> recordings.
>
> Peace,
> Gene
SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Tell 'em to go back off in their own jack yards!
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust10.tnt9.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <358cf473...@news2.ibm.net>, len...@ibm.net (Leonard
> Weldon) wrote:
>
> >Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
> >
> >Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
> >there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
> >cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
> >there is "no difference". Let that same light burn when you
> >are approached with the $6,000 Super-Dooper-WATERWIRE
> >special...Moderation is the word...there is something decent
> >in the middle.
>
> False. The only sham here is in the claim of some folks that pricey cable
> sounds better than cheap cable. That remains unproven.
>
> There is no sham perpetrated by anyone who has gone to the mat and done
> tests to see what's real and what isn't.
SOUND ADVICE: Don't allow this pathetic downer to rain on your parade. Enjoy
your hobby and listen to different cables. There -ARE- differences!
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust10.tnt9.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <358cf473...@news2.ibm.net>, len...@ibm.net (Leonard
> Weldon) wrote:
>
> >Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
> >
> >Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
> >there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
> >cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
> >there is "no difference". Let that same light burn when you
> >are approached with the $6,000 Super-Dooper-WATERWIRE
> >special...Moderation is the word...there is something decent
> >in the middle.
>
> False. The only sham here is in the claim of some folks that pricey cable
> sounds better than cheap cable. That remains unproven.
>
> There is no sham perpetrated by anyone who has gone to the mat and done
> tests to see what's real and what isn't.
SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Tell 'em to go back off in their own jack yards!
If you want to shoose a different cable, by all means, shoose one!
apribadi
With all due respect to those who believe otherwise, I tend to agree with
Zip.
Also, not once in the main article did he at all imply that his store is
the best place for me to buy cables. As far as the blurb at the bottom of
the message regarding Sunshine stereo, I don't see anything wrong with
that. Business is business, as we say.
Cables do indeed make a difference. I am not saying one is BETTER than the
other mind you, but different cables present the information in a different
way. For example, today I demo-ed one of Tara Labs' higher end cable from a
local dealer (I don't recall which one, but it retails at around $900 as
opposed to my current $200 RCAs). I liked the Tara's because of it's wider
soundstage and better depth and overall increased smoothness and
naturalness, but I ended up keeping my Vampires because it colors the
vocals, makes it stronger than it should be, as some people say, but my
lower than impeccable tastes seem to like it that way. What can I say, I
like the female voice.
Granted, this difference may not be as pronounced when comparing other
cables, but as it happens, in my system, it did.
And with that, I must thank Zip for giving me great advice, one which
should be passed along to not-so-knowledgable audio freaks such as myself.
The end result depend on yourself and your tastes. I happen to like
un-naturally strong/warm vocals, so be it. :-)
Sincerely,
Aswin.
Steve Zipser
Aswin:
Thanks. In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG, and the
completely classless & mindless retorts from McCarty, I am glad the
message did get through. Listen & think for yourself. Apparently there
are some control freeks that have a problem with that.
I don't even carry most of the brands I suggested :-)
HAPPY LISTENING!
Zip
Gene Steinberg
In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-37.d.enteract.com>,
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>There are differences in cable sound, and quality as well. My advice
>is to borrow the cables and listen, and compare them to what you have.
Chuck cannot prove a word of the above.
The real advice is to know that just listening without controls is not a
reliable way too know if amps or cables or CD players sound different. But
by learning what has been shown with such controls, you can save money.
Chuck doesn't want you to do that--he'd rather you be fooled into thinking
things sound different, like he was.
Gene Steinberg
>A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
>CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
>system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
>pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
>the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
The above statement is absolutely false. Cables could, in theory, sound
different, but in practice it rarely happens.
Chuck doesn't want you to know that and desperately tries to cloud the
issue with erroneous statements and personal attacks.
But if you ask him to demonstrate if what he says is true, he cannot and
will not.
Gene Steinberg
In article <01bd9c9d$7f77d440$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi" <apri...@pdq.net> wrote:
>Cables do indeed make a difference. I am not saying one is BETTER than the
>other mind you, but different cables present the information in a different
>way. For example, today I demo-ed one of Tara Labs' higher end cable from a
>local dealer (I don't recall which one, but it retails at around $900 as
>opposed to my current $200 RCAs). I liked the Tara's because of it's wider
>soundstage and better depth and overall increased smoothness and
>naturalness, but I ended up keeping my Vampires because it colors the
>vocals, makes it stronger than it should be, as some people say, but my
>lower than impeccable tastes seem to like it that way. What can I say, I
>like the female voice.
I should point out that Tom Nousaine's article in Canada's Sound & Vision
a few years ago included a set of expensive Tara cables in the test, and
with bias controls applied, folks couldn't hear a difference. However, in
an uncontrolled setting, you can hear lots of things, but there is no
measurable factor that could cause any of the phenomena this person
describes.
Gene Steinberg
> In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG
Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have to
say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you wish
to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
Brian L. McCarty
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again,
> without change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do
> you have to say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that
> your opinion comes without facts to support it, just some unproven
> claims.
Because it isn't opinion, it isn't assistance. . . .its SALESHACKING!
HE CAN'T HEP HIMSELF!
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-37.d.enteract.com>,
> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>
> >There are differences in cable sound, and quality as well. My advice
> >is to borrow the cables and listen, and compare them to what you have.
>
> Chuck cannot prove a word of the above.
>
> The real advice is to know that just listening without controls is not a
> reliable way too know if amps or cables or CD players sound different. But
> by learning what has been shown with such controls, you can save money.
Here is the world's most thrifty audio advocate, trying to 'hep us save
our money!
> Chuck doesn't want you to do that--he'd rather you be fooled into thinking
> things sound different, like he was.
I can't apologize for your tin, deaf ears, boychik. If you don't hear
differences, then you don't hear differences. Your loss, your savings
in your hard-earned money, and that's terrific for you.
SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Tell 'em to go back off in their own jack yards!
--
Chuck Ross
Gene wrote:
> Chuck wrote:
>
> >A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
> >CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
> >system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
> >pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
> >the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
>
> The above statement is absolutely false. Cables could, in theory, sound
> different, but in practice it rarely happens.
To some people, of course, this is true. To others, not true. It rarely
happens if you can't hear the differences, to be sure. Sometimes, tho,
on rare occasions, in practise, it does happen, as Gene himself admits.
>
> Chuck doesn't want you to know that and desperately tries to cloud the
> issue with erroneous statements and personal attacks.
Deny, deny, deny. Won't help you, boychik. Your presumptions are ignorant
and gigantic. Actually, gigantic and ignorant.
> But if you ask him to demonstrate if what he says is true, he cannot and
> will not.
Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that the
world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE! (spoken
in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
CHEAP CABLES! They -can- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
ears are not capable of detecting a difference because differences are rare,
demonstrates a great deal of hardened pomposity, which is something that
is demonstrated by all members of the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Gene, don't you ever get tired? Do you have to log on day and night to be
on the alert for any opinions that counter your own?
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
"CONTROL", as practised by Noussaine:
"I am sure you will not be able to tell the difference between Tara cables
and ordinary 18-gauge lamp cord, because no-one ever has under double-blind
conditions. No-one, ever. No-one. But you are more than welcome to try, and
of course, fail, because the test is certain to not allow you to listen for
differences in the usual way, but under -CONTROLLED- (Bwahhahhaa!) conditions!"
Gene was kind enough to fax me a copy of this extraordinary article, which
is so predjudicial, it's hilarious! It's very title indicates that Tom is
gonna getcha, no matter what you think. It's preface, by the publisher of
the magazine is also predjudicial, saying words to the effect, "So you
think you can hear differences in cables, regardless of what you spent?"
The testees, of course, were stunned, and positively amazed that, under
the test conditions, sure enough, no differences were heard, no matter
-how- hard they tried, and, of course, the harder they tried, the harder
it was to hear differences.
The aftermath of this insanely great article was, that everyone of the
testees immediately went out and sold all their expensive cables and
spent the money on new CDs or speakers, right Gene? Or, didn't it
actually turn out that way? It didn't? I didn't think so. Wonder why?
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <6mhebu$8...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
z...@sunshinestereo.com wrote:
>
> > In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG
>
> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have to
> say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
> comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you wish
> to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Tell 'em to go back off in their own jack yards!
--
Fred Whitlock
It's one of many I haven't tried. I've spent a lot of time listening to
speaker cables. For the most part they sound similar enough to make little
appreciable difference. Only once have I had a pair of speaker cables in my
system that really improved the sound and caused a bit of an epiphany for me
(NBS King Serpent.) Unfortunately they are so outrageously expensive
($2000/pair) I didn't even toy with the idea of buying them. I've since
quit fooling with speaker cables. I hope the trek doesn't become too
lengthy or too expensive for you.
--
Fred
Maplewood Photography
http://www.maplewoodphoto.com
apribadi wrote in message <01bd9c4f$c03fd480$10e890d1@-->...
Mike Wolfe
Hi All ,
Funny isn't it, the nastiest tornadoes start with just the slightest breeze.
Regards,
Mike Wolfe
Gruvmyster wrote:
> Steinberg wrote:
>
> >Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> >change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have to
> >say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
> >comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you wish
> >to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
>
> This is too rich. If I wasn't about to vomit from laughing so hard,
> I'd probably have something else to add...
>
> Doug
> --
> "Theory should be study, not doctrine."-- Carl von Clausewitz
Chuck Ross
In article <359376e8....@news.avana.net>, hai...@avana.net wrote:
> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>
> >SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
> >cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
> >CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
> >system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
> >pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
> >the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
>
> Chuck, the fact is that your above "everything sounds different"
> posture is just as stupid (and wrong) as the "everything sounds the
> same" position. And you know it, too.
To coin a phrase, where does it say that I said "everything sounds different"?
(This is a practice practised by Steinberg every other post)
I actually never said, or at least, never intended to say that all of them
sound different. You're right, I do know that. But there are -some- that
-do- sound different. Some of the differences are subtle, indeed. Like
MIT Terminator-3. I'm not sure what they do, but they do something, mostly
very pleasing. AQ Lapis is also distinctive in character. Most Monster
Cable sound similar...sort of warm and soft.
See? I even mention names. I don't mean to imply that I would be foolish
enough to bet money I could tell them apart in a DBT, but nonetheless,
I hear differences.
Marc Blank
Baba Yaga wrote:
> Just outta curiosity - how often have you posted this? While in my urious
> mode - what crawled up your coleltive butts anyway? If people want to buy
> expensive cable or BELIEVE it makes a difference, what business is it of
> yours? Or do non-rational beliefs not have a place in your vision of
> how society should be? Are there any other opinions that you dont like
> and would like to vehemently oppose/antagonize at every drop of a hat?
>
> I am leaning more towards the "objective" (in the stereotypical definition
> used here) point of view, but I find this "we are on a Crusade" kind of
> sanctimonious air some of you have absolutely annoying.
>
> Be happy - most of the wide world agrees with you that expensive equipment
> is useless. Why dont you just the small group of "subjectivists" do their
> thing in peace? They arent bothering YOU, are they?
>
> Gene Steinberg (gstei...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> : False. The only sham here is in the claim of some folks that pricey cable
> : sounds better than cheap cable. That remains unproven.
> :
> : There is no sham perpetrated by anyone who has gone to the mat and done
> : tests to see what's real and what isn't.
>
> --
> Vandit Kalia GO FLYERS!!!!!
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
I don't understand it either. I must assume that these guys are either
altruists (ha, ha) or that they are somehow threatened by subjectivists. I
can't imagine why - they've won all the battles, right: 99% of the world
listens to mass-market, solid-state, CD-based systems. I think the other 1%
just sticks in their craw, because they won't pay obeisance to the victors.
- Marc
Marc Blank
Greg Pavlov wrote:
> Steve Zipser (z...@sunshinestereo.com) wrote:
> : HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
> : [..etc....]
> :
>
> Translation:
>
> "Do you believe that cheap cables are adequate ? How *secure* are you
> in your beliefs ? With all of those ads and articles in Sterophile,
> and all of those dealers telling you that designer cables make a
> *significant* difference, are you *sure* that cheap cables are just
> as good ? Don't you have even one niggling little doubt that maybe
> there is something to this, that all of these smart and objective
> people, who have only *your* good interests at heart, knwo something
> that you don't ?
>
> Look at it this way: you spent a *lot* of money on your system.
> Do you want to take a chance that you're selling it short ? Yes,
> designer cables can be quite expensive. But look, there are a lot
> that are much more reasonable, especially when you compare the cost
> to what you paid for your system. So why take a chance ? Why not
> get yourself some insurance against the *slight* possibility that you
> are really wrong ? Go out and check out some moderately-priced designer
> cables: they look good and they won't hurt your system very much.
> And they won't cost you much more than a couple month's worth of your
> favorite Merlot. How much did you pay for car insurance last year ?"
>
Unfortunately, this sort of thinking (on the part of some audiophiles) does
exist, but it is not as common as you would believe. And yes, salesmen take
advantage of it. But (again), this is true in pretty much every aspect of
life... "Sure, you think you smell ok. But haven't you sometimes thought that
people were looking at you sorta funny. Maybe your deodorant isn't as good as
you thought...."
- Marc
Gruvmyster
Jay B. Haider
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
>cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
>CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
>system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
>pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
>the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
Chuck, the fact is that your above "everything sounds different"
posture is just as stupid (and wrong) as the "everything sounds the
same" position. And you know it, too.
Jay B. Haider
FU-Berlin, 1998-????
"When you're wrong, don't be upset, but rather rejoice, for you're
about to learn something." -Dr James Herod
"Vanity; stupidity; duplicity; lack of ability: these need not impede
a successful political career" - Bagehot, from "The Economist"
George M. Middius
Jay Borg Haider finally utters an opinion that is
brimming with unvarnished truth.
>Chuck Ross wrote:
>>SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
>>cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
>>CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different, and to intimate that YOUR
>>system is not particularly demanding is suggestive of true, unrestrained
>>pompousness, which is something that is demonstrated by all members of
>>the GREAT ABX DO-GOODER SOCIETY!
>Chuck, the fact is that your above "everything sounds different"
>posture is just as stupid (and wrong) as the "everything sounds the
>same" position. And you know it, too.
You bet he knows it. Ding! Well done, JayBorg.
Now, for your chance at the jackpot, what was the
larger point of Chuck's post?
Tick-tock, tick-tock..... Win the CD of your
choice from the Steinborg's collection....
Tick-tock, tick-tock...... Come on, JayBorg, you
can do it.... Tick-tock, tick-tock.....
George M. Middius
Remove "jiffy" to reply
Baba Yaga
Steve Zipser
Gene Steinberg wrote:
> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> change?
Because it is good advice, whereas you are simply trying to dictate your
own tastes to other people. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
> You are surely entitled to your opinion,
But I should keep it to myself, right Gene? You are a friggen
hypocrite. You are saying a thousand times all cables sound the same.
We heard you the first time, sir, so every time ypou post that lie, I
will post sound advice. Note I am not trying to sell cables, I am not
equating sound with price, I am simply suggesting to people that they
make up their own minds, instead of having obsessive compulsive jerks
like yourself and Bwian McCarty try and dictate to everyone. Boy - you
found yourself in great company there, Gene!
> but why do you have to say the same thing with the same words?
Why do we repeat the Gettysburg Address or the Pleadge of Allegiance.
> The fact is that your opinion comes without facts to support it
> just some unproven claims. If you wish to express the viewpoint
> at least change a few words.
Since all I basically say is that people should make up their own minds,
and since you disagree with that, then you are saying you shopuld make
up other people's minds for them. You know better, right, big brother?
Kissin mein tuchus :-)
HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
To those who are not sure what to do about cables in your audio system,
here is SOUND ADVICE!
There are some droids here on r.a.o, who are convinced that wires make
no difference at all like Ostriches with their heads buried in the sand,
and there are some tweakos who believe in water filled jacketed, 30
pound aluminum block Terminator cables and the like as they dance and
prance and howl at the moon.
The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
audiophiles would have you believe.
I presume there are some quality dealers in your area, why don't you
visit some of them that you are comfortable with and arrange to borrow
a set or two and listen for yourself.
Your ears are the final arbiter, not some magazine reviewer and not some
computer geek with an abx box and not some maniac that claims wires are
more important than the room acoustics or speakers!
Check out Straightwire, Cardas, Monster Cable, Audioquest, those are all
good brands.
Steve Zipser
Baba Yaga wrote:
>
> Just outta curiosity - how often have you posted this?
Gene posts that drivel all the time, Vandit. And everytime I see that
crap I will retort! Everytime some jerkoff says the lie that all cables
sound the same. My post simply says people should make up their own
minds. It does not equate price with performance. It does not state
that all cables sound different or all the same. It states listen for
yourself and make your own judgement. Do you disagree with this advice,
Vandit? Gene disagrees with a persons freedom to make a choice. You
are an intelligent person. Think about it.
Zip
--
Greg Pavlov
Steve Zipser (z...@sunshinestereo.com) wrote:
: HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
: [..etc....]
:
Translation:
"Do you believe that cheap cables are adequate ? How *secure* are you
in your beliefs ? With all of those ads and articles in Sterophile,
and all of those dealers telling you that designer cables make a
*significant* difference, are you *sure* that cheap cables are just
as good ? Don't you have even one niggling little doubt that maybe
there is something to this, that all of these smart and objective
people, who have only *your* good interests at heart, knwo something
that you don't ?
Look at it this way: you spent a *lot* of money on your system.
Do you want to take a chance that you're selling it short ? Yes,
designer cables can be quite expensive. But look, there are a lot
that are much more reasonable, especially when you compare the cost
to what you paid for your system. So why take a chance ? Why not
get yourself some insurance against the *slight* possibility that you
are really wrong ? Go out and check out some moderately-priced designer
cables: they look good and they won't hurt your system very much.
And they won't cost you much more than a couple month's worth of your
favorite Merlot. How much did you pay for car insurance last year ?"
greg pavlov
[not affiliated with Canisius College]
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
A person is just about as big as the
things that make them angry.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Steve Zipser
Greg Pavlov wrote:
>
> Steve Zipser (z...@sunshinestereo.com) wrote:
> : HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
> : [..etc....]
> :
>
> Translation:
>
> "Do you believe that cheap cables are adequate ? How *secure* are you
> in your beliefs ? With all of those ads and articles in Sterophile,
> and all of those dealers telling you that designer cables make a
> *significant* difference, are you *sure* that cheap cables are just
> as good ? Don't you have even one niggling little doubt that maybe
> there is something to this, that all of these smart and objective
> people, who have only *your* good interests at heart, knwo something
> that you don't ?
>
> Look at it this way: you spent a *lot* of money on your system.
> Do you want to take a chance that you're selling it short ? Yes,
> designer cables can be quite expensive. But look, there are a lot
> that are much more reasonable, especially when you compare the cost
> to what you paid for your system. So why take a chance ? Why not
> get yourself some insurance against the *slight* possibility that you
> are really wrong ? Go out and check out some moderately-priced designer
> cables: they look good and they won't hurt your system very much.
> And they won't cost you much more than a couple month's worth of your
> favorite Merlot. How much did you pay for car insurance last year
HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
here is SOUND ADVICE!
There are some droids here on r.a.o, who are convinced that wires make
no difference at all like Ostriches with their heads buried in the sand,
and there are some tweakos who believe in water filled jacketed, 30
pound aluminum block Terminator cables and the like as they dance and
prance and howl at the moon.
The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
audiophiles would have you believe.
I presume there are some quality dealers in your area, why don't you
visit some of them that you are comfortable with and arrange to borrow
a set or two and listen for yourself.
Your ears are the final arbiter, not some magazine reviewer and not some
computer geek with an abx box and not some maniac that claims wires are
more important than the room acoustics or speakers!
Check out Straightwire, Cardas, Monster Cable, Audioquest, those are all
good brands.
> greg pavlov
> [not affiliated with Canisius College]
>
> *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> A person is just about as big as the
> things that make them angry.
> *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
--
Stewart Pinkerton
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) writes:
>SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
>cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
>CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different,
Only if the expensive ones are f**king up the sound, which is a lot
more common than you'd think.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
Gene Steinberg
In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that the
>world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE! (spoken
>in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
It is a fact that the ABX test works.
It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
against the stuff you don't like to hear.
Gene Steinberg
>Gene was kind enough to fax me a copy of this extraordinary article, which
>is so predjudicial, it's hilarious! It's very title indicates that Tom is
>gonna getcha, no matter what you think. It's preface, by the publisher of
>the magazine is also predjudicial, saying words to the effect, "So you
>think you can hear differences in cables, regardless of what you spent?"
Since it was a double blind test.
Since it involved others, not Nousaine, and since those people believed in
cable differences, how was it prejudicial?
Please provide facts and figures and not your knee-jerk, content-free
complaints.
Singh
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <01bd9c9d$7f77d440$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi" <apri...@pdq.net>
wrote:
>
> >Cables do indeed make a difference. I am not saying one is BETTER than the
> >other mind you, but different cables present the information in a different
> >way. For example, today I demo-ed one of Tara Labs' higher end cable from a
> >local dealer (I don't recall which one, but it retails at around $900 as
> >opposed to my current $200 RCAs). I liked the Tara's because of it's wider
> >soundstage and better depth and overall increased smoothness and
> >naturalness, but I ended up keeping my Vampires because it colors the
> >vocals, makes it stronger than it should be, as some people say, but my
> >lower than impeccable tastes seem to like it that way. What can I say, I
> >like the female voice.
>
> I should point out that Tom Nousaine's article in Canada's Sound & Vision
> a few years ago included a set of expensive Tara cables in the test, and
> with bias controls applied, folks couldn't hear a difference. However, in
> an uncontrolled setting, you can hear lots of things, but there is no
> measurable factor that could cause any of the phenomena this person
> describes.
Hey, Gene, I think that article was only applicable to Canadians!
--
Greg M. Singh
G...@wwa.com
Sandman
How does one "shoosh" a cable? Does it provide audible sonic benefits?
Sandman
Sandman
Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<gsteinberg-21...@1cust25.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>
> >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that
the
> >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE!
(spoken
> >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
>
> It is a fact that the ABX test works.
>
> It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
>
> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>
> It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
> against the stuff you don't like to hear.
Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times Gene
has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds, thousands,
or tens of thousands?
Sandman
Sandman
Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> In article <6mhebu$8...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com
wrote:
>
> > In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG
>
> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have to
> say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
> comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you
wish
> to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
Anyone else fall off their chair in utter amazement while reading this?
Sandman
Sandman
Chuck Ross <ckr...@enteract.com> wrote in article
<ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>...
> "CONTROL", as practised by Noussaine:
>
> "I am sure you will not be able to tell the difference between Tara
cables
> and ordinary 18-gauge lamp cord, because no-one ever has under
double-blind
> conditions. No-one, ever. No-one. But you are more than welcome to try,
and
> of course, fail, because the test is certain to not allow you to listen
for
> differences in the usual way, but under -CONTROLLED- (Bwahhahhaa!)
conditions!"
>
> Gene was kind enough to fax me a copy of this extraordinary article,
which
> is so predjudicial, it's hilarious! It's very title indicates that Tom is
> gonna getcha, no matter what you think. It's preface, by the publisher of
> the magazine is also predjudicial, saying words to the effect, "So you
> think you can hear differences in cables, regardless of what you spent?"
>
> The testees, of course, were stunned, and positively amazed that, under
> the test conditions, sure enough, no differences were heard, no matter
> -how- hard they tried, and, of course, the harder they tried, the harder
> it was to hear differences.
>
> The aftermath of this insanely great article was, that everyone of the
> testees immediately went out and sold all their expensive cables and
> spent the money on new CDs or speakers, right Gene? Or, didn't it
> actually turn out that way? It didn't? I didn't think so. Wonder why?
>
> --
> If men evolved from monkeys and apes, why are there still monkeys and
apes?
Perhaps the problem was that the "testees" were "folks" instead of normals.
Sandman
George M. Middius
Has the Steinborg inserted a new tape cartridge?
>>Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that the
>>world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE!
>>(spoken in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
>It is a fact that the ABX test works.
A "fact" indeed! ;-)
>It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
Oh, yes, a known "fact." ;-)
>It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
>shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
Is this humor? My god, the Steinborg made a joke.
Have the aliens landed? Is the apocalypse?
>It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
>against the stuff you don't like to hear.
Speaking of music, Mean Gene, have you considered
the possibility that if it weren't for ABXism, the
price of CDs would be about half what it is today?
Singh
Steinberg is so mired in his own absurdity that it is hard to be amazed by
anything he says--and yes, it is true that I don't have any prVf for this
statement. Don't fret, though: I'm flogging myself with an extremely
expensive interconnect cable to serve as penance.
Chuck Ross
> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) writes:
>
> >SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
> >cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
> >CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different,
>
> Only if the expensive ones are f**king up the sound, which is a lot
> more common than you'd think.
It's now not possible for cheap cables to f**k up the sound? I have
a couple that would probably surprise you. I built a pair that definitely
do.
Chuck Ross
In article <6mj2cs$5kd$6...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
> Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> > In article <6mhebu$8...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com
> wrote:
> >
> > > In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG
> >
> > Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> > change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have to
> > say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
> > comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you
> wish
> > to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
>
> Anyone else fall off their chair in utter amazement while reading this?
I've fallen down and can't get up!
Chuck Ross
Gene Steinberg echoed:
> >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that the
> >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE! (spoken
> >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
>
> It is a fact that the ABX test works.
FACT? In your own mind.
> It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
I've taken several of them, thank you.
> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
Acts of God are difficult to prove with shreds of evidence.
> It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
> against the stuff you don't like to hear.
Do I hear another echo?
Chuck Ross
In article <6mj21u$5kd$4...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
> Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> <gsteinberg-21...@1cust25.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> > In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
> > ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
> >
> > >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that
> the
> > >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE!
> (spoken
> > >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
> >
> > It is a fact that the ABX test works.
> >
> > It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
> >
> > It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
> > shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
> >
> > It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
> > against the stuff you don't like to hear.
>
> Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times Gene
> has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds, thousands,
> or tens of thousands?
It's really very simple. He has this text file filled with little snippets
of text, and just copys and pastes to his posts. He hasn't used an original
sentence in 3 years that I'm aware of.
Singh
Foul! Leonard your comments on Zippy's advice are quite valid--the problem
is Zippy's advice has little to do with the original poster's concerns. To
wit, Yamamura cables are expensive, highly regarded cables that I would
love to try. If i were in Zippy's shoes, and had my own shop, I would.
However, since the original post was specifically about these cables,
which, it would appear, Zip hasn't sampled, he probably should have saved
his advice for a post that was specifically about that.
In article <358cf473...@news2.ibm.net>, len...@ibm.net (Leonard
Weldon) wrote:
> Those who have questions about wires are advised to use this bit
> of sage advice as the gospel...it rings with a timeless truth.
>
> Zip posted this about a year ago also...it still rings true.
>
> Use it as a guide to ferret out the extremes on both sides, because
> there is sham on both extremes...Zip lays that out for you...very
> cleary...let your "sham" light come on when someone says
> there is "no difference". Let that same light burn when you
> are approached with the $6,000 Super-Dooper-WATERWIRE
> special...Moderation is the word...there is something decent
> in the middle.
>
> Leonard...
>
> ___________________________________________________
> :
> :HERE IS SOUND ADVICE FOR CHOOSING CABLES!
> :To those who are not sure what to do about cables in your audio system,
> :here is SOUND ADVICE!
> :
> :There are some droids here on r.a.o, who are convinced that wires make
> :no difference at all like Ostriches with their heads buried in the sand,
> :and there are some tweakos who believe in water filled jacketed, 30
> :pound aluminum block Terminator cables and the like as they dance and
> :prance and howl at the moon.
> :
> : The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
> :there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
> :not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
> :audiophiles would have you believe.
> :
> : I presume there are some quality dealers in your area, why don't you
> :visit some of them that you are comfortable with and arrange to borrow
> :a set or two and listen for yourself.
> :
> :Your ears are the final arbiter, not some magazine reviewer and not some
> :computer geek with an abx box and not some maniac that claims wires are
> :more important than the room acoustics or speakers!
> :
> :Check out Straightwire, Cardas, Monster Cable, Audioquest, those are all
> :good brands.
--
Greg M. Singh
G...@wwa.com
Greg Pavlov
Marc Blank (mbl...@eidetic.com) wrote:
:
: Unfortunately, this sort of thinking (on the part of some audiophiles) does
: exist, but it is not as common as you would believe. And yes, salesmen take
: advantage of it. But (again), this is true in pretty much every aspect of
: life... "Sure, you think you smell ok. But haven't you sometimes thought that
: people were looking at you sorta funny. Maybe your deodorant isn't as good as
: you thought...."
:
I believe that you are saying that the consumer audio industry
is fundamentally no different from any other consumer industry.
If that is true, I agree with you.
Gruvmyster
Greg wrote:
>Marc Blank wrote:
>: Unfortunately, this sort of thinking (on the part of some audiophiles) does
>: exist, but it is not as common as you would believe. And yes, salesmen take
>: advantage of it. But (again), this is true in pretty much every aspect of
>: life... "Sure, you think you smell ok. But haven't you sometimes thought that
>: people were looking at you sorta funny. Maybe your deodorant isn't as good as
>: you thought...."
> I believe that you are saying that the consumer audio industry
> is fundamentally no different from any other consumer industry.
Of course it isn't. What I don't understand is why some here spend so
much time trashing high-end audio, when the dollars represented are so
small, compared to laundry detergent or deoderant, or nearly any other
industry segment...
I mean, who cares?
> If that is true, I agree with you.
Is it all evil, IYO?
Stewart Pinkerton
"Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> writes:
>
>
>Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
><gsteinberg-21...@1cust25.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
>> In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
>> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>>
>> >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that
>the
>> >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE!
>(spoken
>> >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
>>
>> It is a fact that the ABX test works.
>>
>> It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
>>
>> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
>> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>>
>> It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
>> against the stuff you don't like to hear.
>
>Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times Gene
>has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds, thousands,
>or tens of thousands?
Could someone please check their brain to see if this affects the
truth of his statements?
Stewart Pinkerton
n...@spam.com (Singh) writes:
>In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
>gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
>
>> In article <01bd9c9d$7f77d440$10e890d1@-->, "apribadi" <apri...@pdq.net>
>wrote:
>>
>> >Cables do indeed make a difference. I am not saying one is BETTER than the
>> >other mind you, but different cables present the information in a different
>> >way. For example, today I demo-ed one of Tara Labs' higher end cable from a
>> >local dealer (I don't recall which one, but it retails at around $900 as
>> >opposed to my current $200 RCAs). I liked the Tara's because of it's wider
>> >soundstage and better depth and overall increased smoothness and
>> >naturalness, but I ended up keeping my Vampires because it colors the
>> >vocals, makes it stronger than it should be, as some people say, but my
>> >lower than impeccable tastes seem to like it that way. What can I say, I
>> >like the female voice.
>>
>> I should point out that Tom Nousaine's article in Canada's Sound & Vision
>> a few years ago included a set of expensive Tara cables in the test, and
>> with bias controls applied, folks couldn't hear a difference. However, in
>> an uncontrolled setting, you can hear lots of things, but there is no
>> measurable factor that could cause any of the phenomena this person
>> describes.
>
>Hey, Gene, I think that article was only applicable to Canadians!
Hmmmmmmmm. What I wonder would be the reaction if anyone were to say
that the article applied only to Sikhs, or perhaps Jews?.......
Stewart Pinkerton
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) writes:
>In article <358cd3f6...@news.dircon.co.uk>, a...@borealis.com wrote:
>
>> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) writes:
>>
>> >SOUND ADVICE: Don't let this pathetic downer-philanthropist type pour
>> >cold water on your hobby! A set of cheap cables is definitely A SET OF
>> >CHEAP CABLES! They -do- sound different,
>>
>> Only if the expensive ones are f**king up the sound, which is a lot
>> more common than you'd think.
>
>It's now not possible for cheap cables to f**k up the sound? I have
>a couple that would probably surprise you. I built a pair that definitely
>do.
Your incompetence is not at issue here.
Sorry, I just couldn't resist that one! :-)
Gruvmyster
Steinberg wrote:
>It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
As a matter of curiosity, how do you prove emotional states? Anecdotal
evidence?
Just wondering...
Gene Steinberg
In article <no-ya02408000R2...@news.wwa.com>, n...@spam.com
(Singh) wrote:
>Steinberg is so mired in his own absurdity that it is hard to be amazed by
>anything he says--and yes, it is true that I don't have any prVf for this
>statement. Don't fret, though: I'm flogging myself with an extremely
>expensive interconnect cable to serve as penance.
>>
I'm amazed how you people are so lacking in simple reading skills to
understand what I said.
Basically, I pointed out that Zip's viewpoint has no factual support.
But if he wishes to present an unsupportable viewpoint about cables, he
should not just post the same boilerplace message, but write a message
that's applicable to the one he's responding to.
Gene Steinberg
In article <6mj21u$5kd$4...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
>Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times Gene
>has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds, thousands,
>or tens of thousands?
It's never happened, however, if we look at your boilerplate messages
about null results have no meaning (using almost the same words each time)
and the messages from Middius and Zipser in which they do really use the
same words and sometimes sentences over and over, one wonders why you
aren't complaining about them. Hypocrisy at work?
Gene Steinberg
In article <6mj2cs$5kd$6...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
>Anyone else fall off their chair in utter amazement while reading this?
Nope, but a few read your response and realized how foolish you continue
to look when you express your ignorance about what people write.
Gene Steinberg
In article <ckross-2106...@usrx2-190.d.enteract.com>,
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
>> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>
>Acts of God are difficult to prove with shreds of evidence.
>
We're talking of double blind listening tests, not the lightning that
stuck you in the head :)
Gene Steinberg
>Hey, Gene, I think that article was only applicable to Canadians!
Hey, Greg, the article was written in the U.S. and those who were tested
live in the U.S. What difference does it make where it was published?
apribadi
Dear combatants,
Look, I don't mean to be rude or anything, but you guys should see
yourselves. I had no idea what kind of emotional goldmine I had uncovered
from such a simple and innocent posting.
Sorry, I can't resist, but this is just a little ridiculous.
:-)
Happy listening.
Aswin.
ps. I've decided to get some secondhand Yamamuras, If I can't tell a
difference, I can sell them with little loss. I will update all of you on
the results of my purely subjective listening tests with the Yamamuras vs
my current Vampire wire setup.
greg singh
Stewart Pinkerton <pat...@popmail.dircon.co.uk> wrote in article
<358d37fc...@news.dircon.co.uk>...
> >Hey, Gene, I think that article was only applicable to Canadians!
>
> Hmmmmmmmm. What I wonder would be the reaction if anyone were to say
> that the article applied only to Sikhs, or perhaps Jews?.......
>
>
> --
>
> Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
>
>
I'm not sure what you're diving at there (as usual) Stew-borg, but I can
tell you this: you make me sikh.
greg singh
Come on Gene, you are talking about a being that is made up of entirely
sand--can't you cut him a break just this once?
Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<gsteinberg-21...@2cust111.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
OldDewd
In article <3590cf60...@news.erols.com>,
Glan...@jiffypop.erols.com sez...
>
>Gene Steinborg rewinds to the all-cables-sound-the-same
>segment.
>
>>>This looking-for-the-perfect-cable-for-my-system quest
>>>is driving me nuts.
>
>>Give it up and don't fall for that snake oil nonsense that cables make
a
>>big difference (or any audible difference in most situations).
>
>Don't fall for this antihumanistic propaganda. Judge
>for yourself. If you think you hear a difference, maybe
>you do.
And maybe you don't. If you do, do you care why you hear a difference?
If you hear no difference, what then? If there's a difference, which is
preferred? Why is that?
Gene
>From: "greg singh" <g...@wwa.com>
>Date: 6/21/98 12:41 PM US Mountain Standard Time
>Message-id: <01bd9d4c$687ade40$173ef1cf@ibm>
>
>Come on Gene, you are talking about a being that is made up of entirely
>sand--can't you cut him a break just this once?
Not till he learns to behave like an adult.
OldDewd
In article <6mi73o$6...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com
sez...
>
>Gene Steinberg wrote:
>> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
>> change?
>
>own tastes to other people. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
What exactly are you doing? Tell the truth to rec.audio.opinion, that a 5
degree temperature change in a room, or a change in humidity, the placement
of the cable, or moving your head a few degrees is likely to make QUITE A BIT
more difference than the exchange of ADEQUATE GENERIC CABLING for most
situations.
---------
" The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
audiophiles would have you believe."
-------------
Wires make a difference. Now have some honesty and give some reason why the
masses should focus their attention from factors that make infinitely more
difference (components, environment) and concentrate on cables. More
difference will be seen by a 25 percent change in the humidity in a room than
in the change from a cable which is adequate for the purposes used to another
adequate cable. Since the truth is somewhere in between, not an untrue
statement, even if useless and possibly deceptive, how about saying how much
difference is "really" seen with these cables? I understand how pushy the
cable people can be, I also sell them, but my customers seem to appreciate my
honesty in explaining the technical differences, and not as surprisingly,
their leftover $$$ usually gets spent on things which make more of a
difference, amplification, speakers, etc. In the end I am not any less $$$
endowed because of my lack of withholding of information, and I have the side
effect of not relying on those pushy cable reps for my staple income.
George M. Middius
Gene Steinborg whined:
>>Come on Gene, you are talking about a being that is made up of entirely
>>sand--can't you cut him a break just this once?
>Not till he learns to behave like an adult.
An interesting distinction. As for you, Genius,
are you a juvenile 'borg or an adult one? Assuming
there's any difference at all, that is.....
Edward Derson Hou
On 21 Jun 1998, OldDewd wrote:
> In article <6mi73o$6...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com
> sez...
> >
> >Gene Steinberg wrote:
> >> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> >> change?
> >
> >Because it is good advice, whereas you are simply trying to dictate your
> >own tastes to other people. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
>
>
>
>
> What exactly are you doing? Tell the truth to rec.audio.opinion, that a 5
> degree temperature change in a room, or a change in humidity, the placement
> of the cable, or moving your head a few degrees is likely to make QUITE A BIT
> more difference than the exchange of ADEQUATE GENERIC CABLING for most
> situations.
Wrong. Zip is correct.
-Eddie
Chuck Ross
In article <gsteinberg-21...@2cust111.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> In article <6mj2cs$5kd$6...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> >Anyone else fall off their chair in utter amazement while reading this?
>
> Nope, but a few read your response and realized how foolish you continue
> to look when you express your ignorance about what people write.
Hmmm...would that few include yourself, Arny, Mikey and Peter? Not to
mention the antichrist Noussaine, himself.
It consistently amazes me, Eugene, that you continue to even answer these
flames. One would expect you to be completely hardened by now, and also
considerably more intelligent than you appear to be, but you can always
be counted upon to answer these flames with the same, redundant, droning,
mindless counters.
Hard to believe.
Chuck Ross
> Foul! Leonard your comments on Zippy's advice are quite valid--the problem
> is Zippy's advice has little to do with the original poster's concerns. To
> wit, Yamamura cables are expensive, highly regarded cables that I would
> love to try. If i were in Zippy's shoes, and had my own shop, I would.
> However, since the original post was specifically about these cables,
> which, it would appear, Zip hasn't sampled, he probably should have saved
> his advice for a post that was specifically about that.
I'm getting really weary of these cable arguments. I finally concede that
there is no possible reason for well-made cables to sound different from
any other well-made cables. Wire is wire.
Now, can we get on to something else?
Marc Blank
Matt Tulini wrote:
> Gene Steinborg wrote:
>
> > It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
> > shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>
> The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
> it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
>
> Matt
Actually, this is its greatest asset, IMO. Since nobody in their right mind would
use ABX to make actual purchase decisions, the results from those tests which HAVE
been run (by I wonder which people) can therefore be used to PROVE that various
differences do not exist. Therefore, no further tests are necessary.
I think I've got it straight...
- Marc
George M. Middius
Chuck Ross said:
>I'm getting really weary of these cable arguments. I finally concede that
>there is no possible reason for well-made cables to sound different from
>any other well-made cables. Wire is wire.
>Now, can we get on to something else?
Ha! You've only just begun to surrender. If you
don't follow the complete and rigorous Surrender
Regimen, the 'borgs will know you're ringleading a
conspiracy to drive them off of R.A.O.
Fortunately, some time ago the Resistance obtained
a copy of the "Secret Cyborgs' Cookbook for
Surrendering Oneself to Superior Knowledge."
Herewith the relevant part:
------ ------ ------ ------ ------
17. Surrendering One's Belief in Sensory Input
To convince the Inquisitorial Practitioner of your
forswearance of previously held reliance on what
you actually heard during real listening, you, the
new assimilee, must perform the following rituals.
1. Renounce your earlier dependence on your senses
every day, in public, for a period of 4˝ months.
2. Shout down all protestations that differ from
the Holy Dogma of Sameness (Cables). You may shout
anything that pops into your head (the strategy of
Random Responses). You need not insist on ABXist
rituals. The only point is to drown out the horrid
humans who contradict us.
3. If you are queried as to the source of your
knowledge of Holy Sameness (Cables), you have won
half the battle. Merely respond with the Approved
Rituals of Deflection, of which dozens are
available. The current Keeper of the Rituals is
the Steinborg, who is the progenitor, successor,
and future leader of a very small detail.
4. When a human resists your deluge of Rituals and
Random Responses, you must discredit the human in
any way possible. Twist his words, set up false
interpretations and knock them down, pluck his
past words out of context -- do anything at all to
distract the other humans.
5. If none of these steps has any effect, simply
recite the Golden Mantra of Sameness: "All
differences are explicable. If no explanation can
be offered, then no difference can exist." This is
a self-contained Logical Paradigm of 'Borgness and
is therefore Holy and Irrefutable.
Good luck on your journey. Check back often. The
Hive will be here always.
Matt Tulini
Matt Tulini
Gene Steinborg wrote:
> Since it was a double blind test.
>
> Since it involved others, not Nousaine, and since those people believed in
> cable differences, how was it prejudicial?
Did you ever think that maybe the placebo effect could void ABX testing. I'm
sure you want to believe that the equipment sounds the same *before* you even
begin the test............
Matt
Jay B. Haider
Matt Tulini <ntu...@voicenet.com> wrote:
>The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
>it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
Huh? Actually, a friend of mine (girlfriend's dad, actually) used
ABX to determine if he should replace his Meridian 501 preamp with a
Sonic Frontiers Line-2. They sounded different, and he preferred the
Line-2. Therefore, the 501 went off to college with Bridget this year.
Jay B. Haider
FU-Berlin, 1998-????
"When you're wrong, don't be upset, but rather rejoice, for you're
about to learn something." -Dr James Herod
"Vanity; stupidity; duplicity; lack of ability: these need not impede
a successful political career" - Bagehot, from "The Economist"
Greg Pavlov
OldDewd (ad...@some.site.maybe) wrote:
:
: What exactly are you doing? Tell the truth to rec.audio.opinion, that a 5
: degree temperature change in a room, or a change in humidity, the placement
: of the cable, or moving your head a few degrees is likely to make QUITE A BIT
: more difference than the exchange of ADEQUATE GENERIC CABLING for most
: situations.
:
But there is no money to be made by Sunset Stereo
from head turning or temperature & humidity changes.
greg pavlov
[not affiliated with Canisius College]
Gene Steinberg
In article <ckross-2106...@usrx2-117.d.enteract.com>,
ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>One would expect you to be completely hardened by now, and also
>considerably more intelligent than you appear to be, but you can always
>be counted upon to answer these flames with the same, redundant, droning,
>mindless counters.
>
>Hard to believe.
It's actually hard to believe that someone like you, with a fairly good
education (as a pharmacist) would continue to spout robotic drivel against
using scientific listening tests in the audio industry. You and your pals
drone on and on and with the same unproven nonsense, utter distortions and
personal attacks.
Talk about borgs!
Gene Steinberg
In article <358DDAC3...@eidetic.com>, Marc Blank
<mbl...@eidetic.com> wrote:
>Actually, this is its greatest asset, IMO. Since nobody in their right
mind would
>use ABX to make actual purchase decisions, the results from those tests
which HAVE
>been run (by I wonder which people) can therefore be used to PROVE that various
>differences do not exist. Therefore, no further tests are necessary.
>
>I think I've got it straight...
>
No, you're wrong as usual.
If ABX tests show, for example (and they do) that proof of audible
differences in cables is lacking, you can buy the cheaper cables without
fear of losing some precious nuance in sound. I'm sure if you query most
of the folks who support ABX in this group, you'll find that they tend to
buy lower cost cables for their systems. I do.
If we're going to talk about people in their right minds, let's
concentrate on the folks, like you, who wish to distort what people write
for some mysterious reason.
Sandman
Stewart Pinkerton <pat...@popmail.dircon.co.uk> wrote in article
<358d36d4...@news.dircon.co.uk>...
> "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> writes:
>
> >
> >
> >Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> ><gsteinberg-21...@1cust25.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> >> In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
> >> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that
> >the
> >> >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE!
> >(spoken
> >> >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
> >>
> >> It is a fact that the ABX test works.
> >>
> >> It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
> >>
> >> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a
single
> >> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
> >>
> >> It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
> >> against the stuff you don't like to hear.
> >
> >Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times
Gene
> >has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds,
thousands,
> >or tens of thousands?
>
> Could someone please check their brain to see if this affects the
> truth of his statements?
Come on, Stewart. We have an agreement. Let's both honor it.
Sandman
Sandman
Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<gsteinberg-21...@2cust111.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> In article <6mj21u$5kd$4...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net>
wrote:
>
> >Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times
Gene
> >has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds,
thousands,
> >or tens of thousands?
>
> It's never happened, however, if we look at your boilerplate messages
> about null results have no meaning (using almost the same words each
time)
> and the messages from Middius and Zipser in which they do really use the
> same words and sometimes sentences over and over, one wonders why you
> aren't complaining about them. Hypocrisy at work?
No, it's just that periodically I have pointed out your hypocrisy when you
pretend (as you do repeatedly in this NG) that your silly tests constitute
"scientific" evidence in support of your nonsense while violating the laws
of statistics in the process. I've known third-graders with a better
comprehension and respect for science than you have. And while countless
posters in this NG have pointed out the numerous flaws in your silly tests,
you continue to spout your pathetic lies as stated above or in very similar
words.
Each of your four statements about "fact" are bold-faced lies which you
have repeated ad nauseum in this NG in one form or another for the past two
years and you know it. Dejanews is replete with examples of this, far more
than any one person could reproduce if they spent a month compiling them.
Sandman
Anonymous
On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Matt Tulini wrote:
> Gene Steinberg wrote:
>
> > It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
> > shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>
> The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
> it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
Hmmm... I have this feeling that not only the preachers but also most of those who oppose
them _do_use_ these results when they are face to face with their decisions. They may lie to others
here but I have strong doubts they could lie to themselves. Do not underestimate them...
Anonymous
On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Matt Tulini wrote:
Point me to _one_single_documented_and_confirmed_instance_ where the placebo effect went past
controlled testing above the level of chance. One.
Anonymous
On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Marc Blank wrote:
> Actually, this is its greatest asset, IMO. Since nobody in their right mind would
> use ABX to make actual purchase decisions, the results from those tests which HAVE
> been run (by I wonder which people) can therefore be used to PROVE that various
> differences do not exist. Therefore, no further tests are necessary.
>
> I think I've got it straight...
Nope. You stay after class to review the basic principles of logic.
Sandman
Singh <n...@spam.com> wrote in article
<no-ya02408000R2...@news.wwa.com>...
> In article <6mj2cs$5kd$6...@news-1.news>, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net>
wrote:
>
> > Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> > <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
> > > In article <6mhebu$8...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
z...@sunshinestereo.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > In spite of the kneejerk reaction from SteinBORG
> > >
> > > Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again,
without
> > > change? You are surely entitled to your opinion, but why do you have
to
> > > say the same thing with the same words? The fact is that your opinion
> > > comes without facts to support it, just some unproven claims. If you
> > wish
> > > to express the viewpoint at least change a few words.
> >
> > Anyone else fall off their chair in utter amazement while reading this?
> >
> > Sandman
>
> Steinberg is so mired in his own absurdity that it is hard to be amazed
by
> anything he says--and yes, it is true that I don't have any prVf for this
> statement. Don't fret, though: I'm flogging myself with an extremely
> expensive interconnect cable to serve as penance.
OUCH!!
Sandman
George M. Middius
Marc Blank writes a new chapter in cyborgic "logic."
>> The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
>> it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
>Actually, this is its greatest asset, IMO. Since nobody in
>their right mind would use ABX to make actual purchase
>decisions, the results from those tests which HAVE been
>run (by I wonder which people) can therefore be used to
>PROVE that various differences do not exist. Therefore,
>no further tests are necessary.
My head is spinning.
>I think I've got it straight...
That's one of us. I hear there's an opening at the
ABXism Sales College. You'd qualify immediately for the
Logic of Cyborgs Chair -- fully endowed, all the
testing you can stand included....
George M. Middius
JayBorg Haider is ready for his new career as
ambassador to Borg World.
>>The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
>>it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
> Huh? Actually, a friend of mine (girlfriend's dad, actually) used
>ABX to determine if he should replace his Meridian 501 preamp with a
>Sonic Frontiers Line-2. They sounded different, and he preferred the
>Line-2. Therefore, the 501 went off to college with Bridget this year.
What happened to the poor man after he got his bank
statement? Whom did he blame? Did his wife leave him?
Anonymous
In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
> change?
Does anyone else find this statement from Geno as humorous as I do?
Leonard Weldon
On 21 Jun 1998 22:22:05 GMT, ad...@some.site.maybe (OldDewd) wrote:
:In article <6mi73o$6...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, z...@sunshinestereo.com
:sez...
:>
:>Gene Steinberg wrote:
:>> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
:>> change?
:>
:>Because it is good advice, whereas you are simply trying to dictate your
:>own tastes to other people. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
_________________________________________________________________
Controversial??
:" The truth is somewhere in between. Wires do make a difference, and
:there is absolutely no doubt about that. On the other hand, they are
:not the be-all, end-all solution that some of the more ardent
:audiophiles would have you believe."
.... Very logical...a pretty good assessment of the "real-world".
:
_________________________________________________________________
OLeDewd comments (dealer)?
:
:Wires make a difference. Now have some honesty and give some reason why the
:masses should focus their attention from factors that make infinitely more
...hmmm, exactly who are you dealing with that does this? The scenario
that you weave, seems to push dealers into a corner that does not
really exist. You tend to push this scenario to the extreme then you
chastise some vague group out there for violating your view. Strange!
Never have I heard any dealer state: "...let's start with the cables".
This whole thing has a phony ring to me...weird! What's the agenda?
:difference (components, environment) and concentrate on cables. More
:difference will be seen by a 25 percent change in the humidity in a room than
:in the change from a cable which is adequate for the purposes used to another
:
:adequate cable. Since the truth is somewhere in between, not an untrue
:statement, even if useless and possibly deceptive, how about saying how much
:difference is "really" seen with these cables? I understand how pushy the
:cable people can be, I also sell them, but my customers seem to appreciate my
:honesty in explaining the technical differences, and not as surprisingly,
:their leftover $$$ usually gets spent on things which make more of a
:difference, amplification, speakers, etc. In the end I am not any less $$$
:endowed because of my lack of withholding of information, and I have the side
:effect of not relying on those pushy cable reps for my staple income.
:
If one does not hear any difference, assesses no value to the
difference, ...that, is your own personal issue to resolve! But, to
find difficulty with "...the truth is somewhere in between..." as
possibly deceptive...is a bit of a stretch. If you believe that the
differences are not worth "misleading" your customers, then
honesty, integrity should make you drop the mid-high end lines.
Let your customer takes home a 16 gauge lamp cable. Then
see how frequently he comes back to your business after a
friend brings over a decent cable for him to audition.
I never had a dealer tell me that cables are among the more
important components in sound change! It has always been
mentioned in terms of rather subtle differences...in certain
component configurations. I've never bought any cable in
my life strictly based on a dealers recommendation. Most
dealers suggest you try it in your own environment. A fair
proposal to me. 90% of all cables I've tried made differences
that were not necessarily an improvement, or actually sounded
worse! Some were just different. Realize that this is me,
sitting in my acoustic environment, listening to CD's that
stress certain acoustic thresholds, with my ear-brain
construct, and all of its variabilities...to repeat this process
several times, and reach the same conclusion that a
particular cable is a bit better...I'm content with this
kind of decision. Your difficulty with this is of very
little importance, overall.
If one does not believe there are any differences...great,
be happy with your sound. However, do realize your
shortcomings when advising others of your inability to
detect certain changes in the audio illusion. Be happy
with the specs...
Leonard...
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
greg singh
Did he match levels ;-)?
Jay B. Haider <hai...@avana.net> wrote in article
<358eebef...@news.avana.net>...
> Matt Tulini <ntu...@voicenet.com> wrote:
>
> >The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids
who preach
> >it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
>
> Huh? Actually, a friend of mine (girlfriend's dad, actually) used
> ABX to determine if he should replace his Meridian 501 preamp with a
> Sonic Frontiers Line-2. They sounded different, and he preferred the
> Line-2. Therefore, the 501 went off to college with Bridget this year.
>
Stewart Pinkerton
hai...@avana.net (Jay B. Haider) writes:
>Matt Tulini <ntu...@voicenet.com> wrote:
>
>>The *major* flaw with ABX testing is that no one, not even the droids who preach
>>it as gospel, uses the results in their purchasing decisions.
>
> Huh? Actually, a friend of mine (girlfriend's dad, actually) used
>ABX to determine if he should replace his Meridian 501 preamp with a
>Sonic Frontiers Line-2. They sounded different, and he preferred the
>Line-2. Therefore, the 501 went off to college with Bridget this year.
Agreed, this is utter hooey. About 18 months ago, I published in this
here newsgroup the results of double-blind testing of about seven amps
that I'd carried out when upgrading my TV sound system. Incidentally,
this was one example of an amplifier DBT with positive results, since
several of the amps, including Rega and Musical Fidelity contenders,
were obviously deficient against my main system Krell, and were tossed
out in the first round. Differences among some of the others were much
more subtle, and I ended up with an Audiolab 8000P, the *very* close
runner-up being (surprise!) the Yamaha AX-570.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
Stewart Pinkerton
"Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> writes:
>Stewart Pinkerton <pat...@popmail.dircon.co.uk> wrote in article
><358d36d4...@news.dircon.co.uk>...
>> "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> writes:
>>
>> >Gene Steinberg <gstei...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
>> ><gsteinberg-21...@1cust25.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>...
>> >> In article <ckross-2006...@usrx2-170.d.enteract.com>,
>> >> ckr...@enteract.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Aha! Now we come to the crux of the argument: THIS bird BELIEVES that the
>> >> >world-infamous "ABX test" can DEMONSTRATE that what HE SAYS is TRUE! (spoken
>> >> >in the manner of Paul Sorvino in "Oh, God!") A FUNNY idea!!!
>> >>
>> >> It is a fact that the ABX test works.
>> >>
>> >> It is a fact that you are afraid to take such a test.
>> >>
>> >> It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a single
>> >> shred of evidence showing flaws in that test.
>> >>
>> >> It is a fact that your posts are content free when you try to argue
>> >> against the stuff you don't like to hear.
>> >
>> >Could someone please check Dejanews to see whether the number of times Gene
>> >has put his computer into this repeat mode is in the hundreds, thousands,
>> >or tens of thousands?
>>
>> Could someone please check their brain to see if this affects the
>> truth of his statements?
>
>Come on, Stewart. We have an agreement. Let's both honor it.
Huh? I made no reference to you (in any capacity!) in my post, I
simply rebutted your point, with no personal comment whatever. If you
think you have carte blanche to be the only presence in a thread,
think again! Make a statement like you did above, expect a rebuttal
like I made above.
It is a fact that level-matched double-blind testing works.
It is a fact that most of the 'subjectivists' on r.a.o. are unwilling
to participate in such tests, for whatever reasons.
It is a fact that neither you nor anyone else here has produced a
single shred of evidence showing flaws in the underlying theory of
level-matched double-blind testing.
The above statements are true now, and will be no less true if they
need to be repeated a thousand times. Some folks are kinda slow on the
uptake........
Stewart Pinkerton
nob...@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) writes:
>In article <gsteinberg-20...@1cust96.tnt6.lax3.da.uu.net>,
>gstei...@earthlink.net (Gene Steinberg) wrote:
>
>> Zip, why do you post this same damn message over and over again, without
>> change?
>
>Does anyone else find this statement from Geno as humorous as I do?
Yup.
Yup.
Yup.
Yup.
Gene
>Subject: Re: Cable Challenge: Yamamura 5000
>From: "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net>
>Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 5:44 AM
>Message-id: <6mljjj$qbb$2...@news-1.news>
>
>
>No, it's just that periodically I have pointed out your hypocrisy when you
>pretend (as you do repeatedly in this NG) that your silly tests constitute
>"scientific" evidence in support of your nonsense while violating the laws
>of statistics in the process. I've known third-graders with a better
>comprehension and respect for science than you have. And while countless
>posters in this NG have pointed out the numerous flaws in your silly tests,
>you continue to spout your pathetic lies as stated above or in very similar
>words.
>
The only pathetic lie here is your claim that ABX tests violate the laws of
statistics. Not only is that not true, but you've been shown time and time
again why it isn't so. It's time you learn how the tests are done, and study
their statistical basis before you continue to spout your unproven silliness.
>Each of your four statements about "fact" are bold-faced lies which you
>have repeated ad nauseum in this NG in one form or another for the past
>two
>years and you know it. Dejanews is replete with examples of this, far more
>than any one person could reproduce if they spent a month compiling them.
>
You have been asked time and time again to provide evidence of what you
consider to be "lies," and you've failed to provide such evidence. It is time
you apologize to everyone here for your fake claims.