2. tech-talk
  3. 982616232

Believers VS. nonbelievers???? GEEzzzzz

Curious how certain products elicit praise from one body and "I can't believe you fall for that snake oil..." from others.
I have a hard time believing some of the stuff (the WORST example is the "Tice Clock" from the early 90's, that you just had to have in the same room!!!)but in general, some of the protesters are ranting on "general priciples" and never tried the stuff/thing in question...(I myself was in that category on power cords till I tried one) and even if they did, it may not have been effective on thier particular system, but just what was needed on someone elses.
==============================================
What I am trying to say in a half formed way is that an honest concern about a product and trying to help guide other away from the "stupid mods" is a difficult path to walk. And since we are all experts and know all there is to know about "audiophilia" maybe we could be more modest in damning stuff others think is worth doing. Rather consider that it may be a path of exploration we choose not to follow now. To say "I haven't explored that but I don't think it's worth trying" vs "you are crazy to think that works and a fool for trying it." is a BIG gap.
Any comments?????
elizabeth
479058's avatar
479058
105 posts
 
Well, speaking as a skeptic, I'd like to say that the lot of you are full of...oh, wait, that's not what you wanted to hear. Actually, I find Audiogon's discussions far more civil than those of, say, rec.audio.opinion. Indeed the most intemperate responses I have seen came from believers who took umbrage at someone daring to suggest that the laws of science ought to be presumed to govern audio. I don't care if you choose to believe something that lacks any scientific basis. What I do care about is the peddling of pseudoscience to justify that choice. It's a gross disservice to the less knowledgeable lurkers who are trying to learn something here.
jayboard
301 posts
 
There are plenty of things in this world that work despite lacking a clear or testable scientific explanation. Trial and error sometimes is the most sound process available to us. But, basing a choice or argument on pseudoscience is another matter. I agree that it's a gross disservice, or just plain gross. I've read some terrible and even self-contradictory explanations of how certain accessories work, but I'm not sure that has much correlation with whether the product works or not. It's marketing dressed up as (pseudo)science, and I agree we'd be better off without it. We had an interesting pseudo-science attack over on the power cord thread, where a doubter claimed to be championing an ultra-rational position but displayed such a lack of understanding of scientific method and logic that it quickly became comical. It just shows that "true believers" are not confined to the tweakers. Or, in other words, there are "true-non-believers" as well as "true believers," and both are guilty of short-shrifting the importance of real world evidence. "True-non-believing" has the advantage of being cheaper, however.
mikec
199 posts
 
I've always honored open-mindedness with self control along with common sense and rightousness. Many members seem to exibit these qualities with intelligence. No i don't believe in Santa Claus anymore but lend merit when merit is deserved. Many fine post from many fine members.
bob_bundus
1,834 posts
 
Don't recall where I read this, but here's the deal on Tice clock. The clock's purpose was to load the audio rig's AC line with a constant current, thus swamping out smaller current variations in the line which are caused by the constantly varying audio signals. You can achieve the same effect with a small lamp (use an incandescent) or anything else presenting a constant load. Theoretically this improves your sound. In practice, this is one of the few tweaks I have tried that didn't seem to make any difference, at least at our house. ymmv
garfish
1,840 posts
 
Jayboard; well stated position. I would just add one thing. Sometimes the lines between true science and pseudo-science can become blurred IMO. I fact, I believe that high-end audio is an endeavor that is inherently amenable (susceptible?) to both because the engineering and tech. types who build our equipment are often operating at the "cutting edge" of music reproduction technology. Well, the cutting edge also attracts the pseudo-scientists who just want to "make a buck". Cheers. Craig.
More to discover