and how does one know when the cooking's "done"? Oh that's right,i f you are one of the "golden ear experts", with vast knowledge unavailable to all except a select few, who've "holmed" in on the results, eh?
You wait for the bell to say tinggggggg.
LOL"... if you are one of the "golden ear experts", with vast knowledge unavailable to all except a select few, who've "holmed" in on the results, eh?
@ Audiophools...
No, people have experimented for years. And many of these people are engineers. DC doesn't seem to work as well, because that is not what we listen to. It is better to use a signal with a lot of harmonics. Some people sweep tones, others use a fixed relatively low frequency square wave. Both seem to work. You know when it is done when it sounds as good as it is going to get. Usually, a serious person has previously broken-in cables of the same type, to compare to. We have done this for years and years. I have personally heard the differences between broken-in and non-broken-in cables. On a 1//3 million dollar system (without any of my designs) it can be obvious. In fact, the eye doctor who runs the office where I was just operated on, has this system. He can hear the difference, and it means more to HIM than it does to me.
You seem to like to inject important sounding words and phrases into your posts to make yourself sound legitimate.
I found this explanation of Science at Wikipedia -
Using controlled methods, scientists collect observable evidence of natural or social phenomena, record measurable data relating to the observations, and analyze this information to construct theoretical explanations of how things work. The methods of scientific research include the generation of hypotheses about how phenomena work, and experimentation that tests these hypotheses under controlled conditions. Scientists are also expected to publish their information so other scientists can do similar experiments to double-check their conclusions. The results of this process enable better understanding of past events, and better ability to predict future events of the same kind as those that have been tested.
My point is that if you feel you are an 'engineer' - someone who applies scientific knowledge within technological constraints to a given application - you really ought to use the methodology of engineers and / or scientists. Chiefly, the correct usage of Scientific Method. Otherwise, you are more accurately described as a tinkerer at best, and a snake-oil salesman at worst.
If you have individually bilked eye doctors into hundreds of thousands of dollars in unnecessary equipment, bravo unto your sales ability. The rest of us remain unconvinced.
Oaty: To be fair, John doesn't sell cable burn in equipment. The equipment he DOES sell is of very high quality, most of it is very reasonably priced for the build quality, and in terms of stability, distortion, and reliability, it's up there with the best. Yes, it's pricey, but so was the traditional choice of doctors and dentists, McIntosh.
That's not to endorse some of the seemingly goofy things he believes in without evidence, nor to understand why he won't validate his assertions, but when it comes to the equipment he designs, criticism is (IMO) unwarranted. I'd be delighted to own one of the JC power amps, if I could afford it.
That's not to endorse some of the seemingly goofy things he believes in without evidence, nor to understand why he won't validate his assertions, but when it comes to the equipment he designs, criticism is (IMO) unwarranted. I'd be delighted to own one of the JC power amps, if I could afford it.
boiling
I boil all of my cables in linseed oil befofe use -- the difference is amazing, it produces greater transparency above 12KHz.
I boil all of my cables in linseed oil befofe use -- the difference is amazing, it produces greater transparency above 12KHz.
It's patently obvious you are far, FAR more knowledgeable in science, audio technology, and engineering than I am. Yet even I know that scientists and engineers believe absolutely nothing (at least within their fields) without substantial objective proof. You categorically refuse to acknowledge and use even the most basic of scientific tenets within your given fields. Why? You have absolutely zip as far as objective reasoning to substantiate your claims.
Burn-in cables? *sigh*
How about we end this thread; end this nonsense? We must surely look like idiots to whatever part of the population still respects common sense and theories backed up with proof. I was going to type more, but I've got to go burn-in my nose hairs so I can smell a rat better.
How about we end this thread; end this nonsense? We must surely look like idiots to whatever part of the population still respects common sense and theories backed up with proof. I was going to type more, but I've got to go burn-in my nose hairs so I can smell a rat better.
I respect what you are saying, and surely, I drool over pricey equipment as well. The problem is that like many, I began reading in these forums to find a quick and dirty way of increasing my knowledge without doing my own research when it came time for me to invest in quality audio gear.
I would have saved considerable time, effort, frustration, and most of all money if I hadn't been deluged by so many audiophools claiming that a 'veil would be lifted' and a 'greater dimension in my sound-stage' may be had with boutique cables, cryo-treated stuff, burn-in, and exotic circuit components made by so and so...
Certainly there was some good advice in there, but for the most part, it was drowned out by this sort of nonsense.
sadly, it is these woo-wwo's that are easily embraced by some, and it seems to be universal, even in my little corner of the world, i find folks that are religiously fanatic about cables without even the slightest hints.....
mr. john curl indeed is a creator of fine audio equipment, but his endorsement of woo-woos's doesn't make them right......
oh and mr. curl, i first came to know about complimentary symmetry input stages from guys like m. leach, dan meyer, and jim bonjiorno.....i seem to miss your publication on this matter....
Last edited:
You're too generous SY, and too trusting.
jc is a guy who took a wrong turn a long time ago and has sacrificed his integrity on the altar of commercialism. Now there is no way back without a monumental climb-down with who-knows-what commercial or moral consequences. The damage he and his ilk have done to rational audio engineering design is incalculable. I don't rate him down amongst the arms dealers, but if I were him I would have a hard time living with my conscience. Kind of like a Nixon of the audio world.
Guys that unscrupulous, you just don't give them the benefit of the doubt.
w
+10 "Class A" ..... woo woo! You simply do not have to look through "six degrees" before finding a brother in arms that does happen to sell a burn in boîte for a few thousand. If there's a great disconnect between one's own products and their published philosophy credibility naturally suffers. Humoring that across a few thousand posts long threads extends the suffering like a cancer.
Why would you say such damaging things about anyone? I don't know the man, and I find it hard to believe that you do.
To oatmeal769: you should build syn08's circuits if you want something that measures up the wazoo.
Wow, have I sold out? Where is the money? I sit here, alone, in my small apartment, one bedroom full of audio test equipment, the other with the stored volumes of everything that I have been able to get ahold of on audio design and listening, and I have sold out to the dark forces? Libel! I say!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.