High End Myth Glossary.

Agree with your comments about room acoustics, especially reflective surfaces.

I‘m not certain what the term audio furniture covers. If the manufacturer builds a cabinet with similar construction as home furniture, then says it has mystical properties, I refuse to believe it.

There are stands that have low resonant shelves, pointy feet and such that do effect the sound of equipment. Like all audio tweaks, the improvement can be very big or very small depending on the room, equipment and listener.

I don’t know if Sound Anchors, Systrum and similar products would fall into the category of audio furniture or not. They support equipment, speakers and such and make an audible difference.

Some of these myths come across as being just plain silly. Too many people believe if a difference cannot be measured that it is not a difference.

The issue is that our science is still in an infancy state, but likes to make statements about things that are way over it's head! If I were to give you a set of measuring cups, but not just any set, a really good set of stainless steel, ranging from 1/8th of a cup through a two cup measuring set that is made so accurately that they contain exactly the marked amount within .00001% deviation could you tell me how many wpc I am pushing when I have my pre-amp turned up exactly half way and I'm driving an average of 4 ohms on my speakers with my Krell FPB 200 amplifier.

Remember these are the best measuring cups known to mankind and are garanteed to be within the tolerances listed above. If you were to have any trouble with these cups and the determination I requested, although I don't know how this would be possible, I will also provide the best German micrometer that money can buy!

Most of the measurements listed when equipment is designed and/or reviewed are fine as far as they go, but too much of electronics is still a complete mystery to science. Saying that there is no measurable difference between two pieces of gear so they must be the same is like looking out to the horizon and saying the earth is flat. This statement is easily observable, just look out the window, the earth is flat. Ultimately though this is still wrong!

Unlike Bob Bundus says every aspect of life is governed by absolutes, just because we don't know or like the absolutes does not compromise the truth. Opinions don't change truth either, even if we reduce them to the level of absurdity by calling them myths.

I think I was misunderstood Pbb. I agree with Marakanetz. I interpreted the comments of bob bundus to mean that the first post of this thread was all nonsense. Perhaps I misunderstood him. If, in fact, that is his position I disagree, I think that there is a great deal in this hobby that is utter nonsense, some of which was listed by Marakanetz and some of which are absolutes. If you look at one of the last threads I chimed in on, you'll see that I feel quite strongly about this.

The word audiophile is more and more becoming synonymous with delusional. Perhaps it's the "peer pressure" to prove to friends, family and audiogon members that we have some hypersensitive hearing or the ultimate golden ear.

Consider for a moment a given component or system. There's a thread going on right now about Audio Note DAC's. I've never heard one--maybe they're the greatest thing ever, maybe they're garbage. Two people on that thread claim that there is something wrong with the bottom end. A whole ton of people said that they must be doing something wrong or are simply lying about ever hearing one. This is the problem with high end audio--the only acceptable review, comment etc. on an expensive component is praise. Neutral will get you into trouble, but perhaps not flamed too badly. A negative review will brand you either deaf, a liar, or an idiot. Furthermore, If you tell the reviewer that they are wrong and the component is good, you are adhering to some standard (aka an absolute). If you agree with the reviewer then the exact same logic applies. The contention that there are no absolutes in audio is an absurd statement.

We may have gotten our signals crossed. What I find remarkable is that the people who truly believe that everything is in the head of the listener are very often the ones who have very limited knowledge of the basics of electronics. I don't purport to know a hell of a lot about the basic science behind electronics, but I know enough to recognize poppycock when I hear it. On the other hand, it does not all sound the same. Often enough there would be a simple fact based explanation, but it is a lot more entertaining to talk in broad terms emphasizing aesthetics and to bring everything back to one's individual likes or dislikes than to use a double track approach of measuring and listening. It is so strange how one school always fears that the other approach will, somehow, taint their judgment.

Continue the list:

A GOLDEN EAR TEST.

...for a perfect and sensible ear(s) that able to hear .1dB differences:

1. Eat a bowl of grean pea soup with smoked chops of pork turkey or beef.
2. Play a critical recording you're intended to judge a system performance.
3. Pass some gas during an auditioning(preferably quiet especially for those who has a microphonic tube equipment so you won't interrupt a listening test)...

In result you should hear sonic changes of more than 0.1dB(not realy sure if worse or better) as the air pushed by the speaker has some content of impurities that somewhat change the air dencity and thus vary the room accoustics.