EnABL Processes

[dlr]

Originally posted by Cal Weldon

To all:

Whatever way you wish to argue this point, and I have equal respect for both parties, if you haven't had the opportunity to listen to the EnABL effect, your opinion is of less value than those who have.

To what expressed opinion do you refer? None of us who have been skeptical and have not heard a treated driver have voiced an opinion with regard to the sound of a treated driver. Not one if memory serves. I believe that John K treated a driver, measured it and commented on it, so I hope that you'll accept his stated opinion.

This is independent of the scientific analysis being brought forth. Personally, I'm not looking to understand the cause(s) as others are striving to do. I am interested in the effect. My interest is in listening to the music. Music without perceived colouration. The only thing I know, subjective as it is, is there is less of it (colouration) in the one and only set of EnABLed drivers I have listened to as compared with the identical drivers in identical boxes in a side by side comparison.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of a treated driver. I certainly have no reason to question it, never have, never will.

For the nay sayers, I suggest you pocket your preconceived notions and simply conduct the experiment yourself. Until you do, this thread will continue along it's same path. Frankly I don't see the point in that.

Cheers.

What experiment, listening to a treated driver? What's the point? I believe that I would hear a difference, be it positive, negative or neutral, I don't know and I don't care. It doesn't matter on that issue, that's really never been in question. Skeptics have never said that a change does not occur in a driver's response, quite the contrary, we were adamant in pointing out the fallacy that a change in perception occurred without a consequent change in driver response. Your suggestion serves no purpose insofar as the thread goes, it went well beyond "Is there a change or is there not?".

Dave

[john k...]

Cal,

Don't worry. The thread will continue as it has because, as I said, it not really about what enable does or doesn't do. Its about discussing what it migh or might not do. If we come to some conclusion what would we next? I guess we could go over to AA and invade. AJin FLA posted an interseting like over there. I wonder how it relates to EnABle? http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...wor&print=true

Dave (planet10) Maybe you should raise the price of those enabled Fostex you're selling.

[sreten]

Originally posted by Cal Weldon

Hardly a fair comparison .......
Cheers.

Hi,

A comment intended for the last sentence but it may not read like that.

My bad. I was not nay-saying EnABLing can affect drivers postively.

/sreten.

[AJinFLA]

Originally posted by Cal Weldon

if you haven't had the opportunity to listen to the EnABL effect, your opinion is of less value than those who have.

Cal, with all due respect, I find this a puzzling position to hold. I would guestimate that 90-95% of members here have not had the opportunity to listen to other members designs, be it amplifiers, loudspeakers, etc.
Would that then not make 90+ % of thread replies on the site opinions of less value?

cheers,

AJ

(p.s. Please forgive if this reply is slotted in the thread sequence hours after the post being replied to. Mod screening takes a while)

[Cal Weldon]

Originally posted by john k...
Don't worry.

I won't. Something like this will not affect my sleep. Thank you for your concern.

Originally posted by AJinFLA
Would that then not make 90+ % of thread replies on the site opinions of less value?

I understand what your saying. Perhaps my wording should have read "If you want your opinions to carry more weight in the eyes of those with personal experience, then do a subjective test." All the meters and graphs in the world aren't going to tell you what it sounds like, they only give you a starting point.

My thought is that all the technical discussion has yet to prove or disprove anything. I feel sorry for Bud who thought he was on the right track with the explanation only to be ambushed by the science aficionados. Perhaps he should have taken a different approach but that's not for me to say. You guys have taken him to task on that one, Some with near pit bull ferocity. I think the point has been made.

I believe it was SY who said he would not judge a wine by it's chemical analysis. I see a similarity in those who will not allow themselves to experience what is brought forth and are doing themselves and the rest of us a disservice.

At this point, what more can be said from either side without repeating?

[john k...]

Originally posted by Cal Weldon



I believe it was SY who said he would not judge a wine by it's chemical analysis.

So would the inverse be anymore valid? Would you accept a chemical analysis based on taste?

[Cal Weldon]

John,

I can't be sure but are you augmenting my point? I am not swayed by the label on a bottle of wine or an in depth analysis anymore or less than I am about an FR or other plot. I feel there is no scope or WHY that will influence my opinion more than the most subjective test of all, be it a taste test or a good listening session. My ears are very sensitive to the middle frequencies and if there is something good or bad that I experience, the graph can only really point out where the deficiencies are. They can't tell me why I enjoy one speaker over the other when the graphs read virtually the same.

I am also surprised that subjectivity does not play a bigger role in this thread. In the end, if there is a difference in the interpretation of the transducer's ability to deliver what pleases your aural senses, then mission accomplished IMHO. After beating Bud's interpretation to death, why have we not accepted that a good many experienced listeners have enjoyed the alteration regardless of it's origin(s)?

I think I have expressed my opinions as best I can so perhaps I will step back and just watch from this point unless there is concern in what I wrote.

Cheers.

[john k...]

Originally posted by AJinFLA


Cal, with all due respect, I find this a puzzling position to hold. I would guestimate that 90-95% of members here have not had the opportunity to listen to other members designs, be it amplifiers, loudspeakers, etc.
Would that then not make 90+ % of thread replies on the site opinions of less value?

cheers,

AJ

(p.s. Please forgive if this reply is slotted in the thread sequence hours after the post being replied to. Mod screening takes a while)

Actually I've heard a lot about all those reporting success but very little form them. How many here? A hand full or two? Hardly a landslide.

[pedroskova]

Originally posted by john k...



Actually I've heard a lot about all those reporting success but very little form them. How many here? A hand full or two? Hardly a landslide.

...probably on the order of how many people have heard your loudspeakers.

[BudP]

Actually I've heard a lot about all those reporting success but very little form them. How many here? A hand full or two? Hardly a landslide.

I have had it suggested to me that we split this thread at this point. This thread to remain the Quantitative based test and science oriented thread it has become. The new thread to be devoted to applications, subjective reports, DIY enthusiasms, unscientific and non rigorous questions and answers. Basically a Qualitative version of a nut's and bolt's of EnABL.

I support the idea, since the original point of the thread was to show those who want to experiment and experience what EnaBL brings about, how to do it. Somewhere other than private emails to me, to find out how to accomplish this.

All who have contacted me for this sort of information, have said they did so because they were not interested in wading through the arguments and risking a thrashing by folks who did not share their enthusiasm.

What are the chances that everyone here can abide by this sort of split? It would provide a look into just how many hands full are involved in whatever landslide is being negated in this quote.

This split would require that only subjective posts and informational posts are allowed on the new thread, though certainly posts with links to the Quantitative thread would be allowed. Comments?

Bud