Jump to content

My response to "Boycott the sub-forum"


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, esldude said:

I wouldn't have used justify.  But it is the key question never answered. 

 

As we know many believe what they hear.....period.  Others know hearing is unreliable in some circumstances.  So when someone hears something which is technically dubious or physically impossible others will point that out.  And hence the problem.

 

The "problem" is that some people have no trouble hearing the distortion introduced by sub-optimal implementation, design or integration of the electronic circuitry used for audio. And the 'objectivists' rail and rail against that concept, because it disturbs their thinking on how the world "should work!!" ... if they could just accept that the real world doesn't nicely fit together like the textbooks imply, then everyone would have a nicer time discussing what's going on ...

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Samuel T Cogley are you really trying to be an audio martyr? If you want to leave, just leave rather than being so disruptive I have to ban you. 

 

His last question seemed genuine and I am not even sure I like the dude! (kidding, we have historically jousted). :)

 

I am still hopeful of finding common ground.  Let's give it a try?

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

This thread is disruptive?  Man, that bar sure has lowered since the weekend.

 

This thread in and of itself isn't disruptive. I can handle it. Your posts within it are getting a bit over the top.

 

 

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

When the civility dust up happened, I did exactly what you asked.  I stopped all snarky comments.  I contributed to the Polestar effort.  I helped random people in the help thread.  I know you are aware of these things.  And I just kept quiet hoping others would too and your purge would not be necessary.

 

Absolutely aware of this. You've expressed appreciation for this site and it has been really great to see you participate in a different fashion than snark. I'm also very appreciative of what you've done to help the site. 

 

 

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

So hopefully you understand my disappointment when I was rewarded with the purge.

 

I understand your disappointment, but I believe it's directed at the wrong person(s). Those who elected to not follow the rules are gone. Please voice your displeasure toward them for acting the way they did. 

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

I understand your disappointment, but I believe it's directed at the wrong person(s). Those who elected to not follow the rules are gone. Please voice your displeasure toward them for acting the way they did. 

 

Ok, I'm leaving for now.  When you re-instate Scoggins, can I come back for just one "I told you so"?  🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Ok, I'm leaving for now.  When you re-instate Scoggins, can I come back for just one "I told you so"?  🙂

 

Darn, that isn't the direction I was hoping for.  Best wishes to you.

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

This tells me that Ethernet cables (or USB cables for that matter) simply CAN’T alter the sound of the digital signal passing through them, BUT, THEY CLEARLY DO! Why? I haven’t a clue. So just as you can’t tell me why it should alter the sound, all I and those like me can do is tell you why it SHOULDN’T affect the sound.

 

The reality is in fact very simple ... all real world implementations of circuitry, and connections have parasitic behaviours, which in audio are just enough to be audible - this was a lesson I learnt 35 years ago, and everything since keeps confirming this ... jumping up and down, pointing at a scope, and saying, "I can't see anything wrong!!" means a big fat zero - the ears are the primary deciders, measurements are very decidedly secondary.

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Keep in mind now that all the miscreants have been purged, your posts will begin to look more snarky.  You're next Jud!  😄

 

I'll take the risk. 🙂 Go in peace.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> wi-fi to router -> EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> USPCB -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

IMO, George, you are being far to kind to those people, and I suggest that you are attributing an undeserved favourable interpretation to their posts. Unlike you, who is prepared to accept the existence of these differences although you are unable to offer an explanation for them, they tend to adopt a very different approach. Not only do they insist that there can be no such sonic differences, but they also maintain that there is, in fact, no possible sonic difference. Moreover, they tend to ridicule anyone who suggests that there is, and declare that anyone who does so is deluding himself/herself.

As I said earlier, there is no excuse for incivility on any subject. Having said that, I do understand their extreme skepticism. Cables are passive, not active components. That means that any alteration of sound attributable to cables, be that alteration on an analog cable or a digital cable, is caused because something in the signal is being SUBTRACTED from that signal, as cables, by definition, cannot add anything. I know that Ethernet cables and USB cables change the sound because I’ve heard it. I suspect that these naysayers of which we speak here, have not heard it. When you haven’t experienced a phenomenon, and that phenomenon, by all knowledgeable accounts SHOULDN’T HAPPEN, it’s easy to attribute it to some non-system based cause like one’s imagination, or perhaps a willingness to lie for reasons of self-aggrandizement. 
After years of denial, I started to notice, for instance, that every different USB cable I tried sounded different. I became so frustrated by this (and technology’s inability to explain it) that I purged USB from my system where possible I now use only SPDIF for digital (and mostly Toslink, at that) because I have found that SPDIF does not change the sound from cable to cable (either coax or Toslink). I realize that Toslink limits me to a 96KHz sampling rate, but I think that higher than that just   Makes the file size bigger without providing (for me, anyway) a concomitant increase in SQ (diminishing returns, and all that). As usual, YMMV!

George

Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep doing that, guys, and I may have to leave from sheer embarrassment. No more of that stuff! (And grateful thanks to @AudioDoctor, sincerely, for laughing at the idea!))

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> wi-fi to router -> EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> USPCB -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

For me, anyone who is in this hobby and utterly rejects the notion of confirmation bias or the merits of blind testing is somewhere on the irrational scale.  Where exactly isn't really the issue.  But there is a sort of stubbornness with some when it comes to accepting the existence of confirmation bias.  I'm not saying that's you, but you've never struck me as a paragon of rational thought.  Perhaps I misjudged?

 

"cables sound different and I don't know why" isn't as eye popping to me as, "I can't explain why I believe what I believe, I just do".

 

 

And I see the stubbornness of those who refuse to try and understand why using "confirmation bias" as a stick to beat people over the head with, every time they don't like what the person is saying, is just downright annoying and irritating. This blind belief that people are just dopey, most of the time, reminds me of a episode of "Doc Martin" ... as one of the characters in the series say, "People in the village think you're just a tosser, but I like you" - or something along those lines ... 😝.

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jud said:

You keep doing that, guys, and I may have to leave from sheer embarrassment. No more of that stuff! (And grateful thanks to @AudioDoctor, sincerely, for laughing at the idea!))

 

Ever humble and a gentleman :)

 

OK, I'll stop.  But I have always liked and respected your posts.

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...