Holographic imaging

I was referring to an instantaneous shift in velocity of 1:1.005

Well you'll have to be more precise then if you want to help me understand. What you have described is just too vague for me to follow which is why I gave a specifc example with specific frequencies with a hypothetical result.

FWIW- We don't hear "instantaneous shifts in velocity" - we hear sound vibrations or oscillations which is why I tried to boil things down to frequencies and power that would result from IMD distortion from two frequencies passing through a non-linear amplifier. (non-linear meaning that the signal gets amplified differently depending on its level)

BTW an "instantaneous shift in velocity" would cause a sharp discontinuity in what is normally a smooth waveform - it would necessarily contain lots of high frequencies and not 1005 Hz. This is a fundamental fact from mathematics.

Roger, you don't seem interested in answering my questions. Its been a while since I first posted them and you have made a number of posts in the meantime.

So: I don't think you have any intention and that is borne out by your actions.

You have contradicted yourself at nearly every turn, I could pass that off as poor writing skills but re-reading them has brought me to a different conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

The explanation of a circuit that does something, based on a principle that cannot be measured in any way by any type of test or laboratory equipment, cannot be quantified, verified, with no mathematical relation or formula, cannot be heard and can only be explained yet contradicted by the designer of the circuit is a complex explanation.

The simple (correct) explanation is a circuit that either does nothing, or does something, and the principle behind it is simple (for example, a tonal coloration), and whatever it is really doing is something that the designer refuses to divulge or is clueless about.

IMO we are dealing with a case of the Emperor's New Clothes. IOW I'm with Tvad on this one.

I think you got him Ralph;check and mate.

Atmasphere,

Sorry It's been a long day and I do have a life.
I will try to get back to you soon.

Regards,

Roger

IMO we are dealing with a case of the Emperor's New Clothes. IOW I'm with Tvad on this one.

I second Tvad and Ralph but folks remember I am dumb engineer so I don't believe a tenth of the scientific claims in any subject in the audio domain - unless it fits my college brainwashing, which means it is well known and documented in AES journals (who still make mistakes but far less often or with such hyperbole as found on internet threads or in audio rags).

What surprises me though - is how highly selective we are being - why are we attacking Roger Paul's gear in particular? - I mean there is a lot more out there that is WAY WAY WAY WAY more dubious - magic pebbles, Shakti holograms, $7000 cables, $1000 interconnects - nobody jumps to shout the "Emperor has no clothes" with any of that gear - even if it is patently obvious to anyone with a science background. Why is this?

I suggest a truce here. FWIW - If the H-Cat sounds great (like the Harmonix Holy Grail box I gave a link to earlier in this thread) then for those who like what it does then good luck to 'em - whatever it does is a good thing to those who like it! We don't need to know why - just as nobody can explain why Anjou Pear is so utterly amazing and why dozens of people jump to defend the incredible benefit to be had with esoteric cables when this subject is raised (perhaps they all work for Noel Lee!).