You regularly jump in to JCs defence, but as been pointed out before some of JCs replies are rather harsh...he does give as good as he gets.
This is the most stupidest comment ever, narrow minded and biased, read back a few pages to I believe one of Georges posts where he quotes certain derogatory replies from a subjective member.
This argument has not long just finished, then like now it was prompted by a couple of posts from the JC fan club sticking up for their hero. It is open debate and as long as certain lines are not crossed (that's what the moderators are for and a good job they do balancing all the discussions on here) then we are free to voice our opinions.
While I agree that for something to become solid knowledge it needs to be quantified and measureable at least to some extent, and while I can understand that after believing somethign for years and then finding it challenged with no hard evidence can be annyoing, I would still agree with you Frank.
The "objectivists" very often have a hard time even theoretically entertaining the very idea that they may not be right. Yet, most great human achievements were made by first challenging their "objective" beliefs.
And, let's be honest about it, we ALL need at least some time to accept the notion that something we have believed for years may just not be so. And we rarely allow for the time needed for a vague notion to become better explored and better known.
Throughout human history, it was always the "objectivists" who burned the unbelievers at the stake. It was the "objectivists" who invented the Inquisition. But it was hardly ever the "objectivists" who invented anything new.
Not so, at least in my case.
I do not object to anyone having a different view and plainly saying so. I object to the way it is done in case of JC.
It's one thing to say that you disagree and make your argument, but it is entirely another thing to call someone names, as has been done here.
I am not a fan of anyone, however there are those I agree with and those I do not. That's just me, and I wouldn't try to convert or debunk anyone just because he has a different outlook.
Leaving aside the Bybee, which I have never even seen, let alone tried out for myself, how is it "objective" to imply that JC, who has had a noted career in audio for many years, is some kind of swindler? If someone thinks that Bybee is just another snake oil product, fine, say so, but do not imply someone with a long history of excellent products behind him is a swindler.
Do that and whoever says it that way reduces himself to a failed and nevious wannabe.
Anyone ever invloved with manufacturing knows that there have been great successes, lesser successes and failures in EVERYONE'S professional history and in ever company's history. But one miss does not discredit thw whole company, or any one person, even if it's a biggie.
Tsk ... and me thinking that some would be flattered - after all, I did say "highly skilled" ...
Except, of course, witch burning, the prosecution of Christians by the Romans, the Inquisition (you are wrong about that), the Iconoclastic Fury, the flogging of bloggers in SA, etc. It is always the believers punishing those who don't share their believe, with those discounting all fact free convictions being on top of their destroy-maim-annihilate list.
The only things invented by subjectivists are prejudice, authoritarianism and violence towards science and progress.
....the prosecution of Christians by the Romans....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso
Dan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso
Dan.
Last edited:
I heard an historical view that the popularity for scientific objectivity was greatly enhanced around the time that the Christians were burning witches in Europe - If you said anything controversial that you could not prove - things could get hot so there was a strong fear based motivation to be able to demonstrate proof. Perhaps at this point people begin to mistrust their intuition
Last edited:
A lot of village idiots around recently...mind if I rejoin the party?
I have been branded as a subjective! I do not generally get into argument on such matters as my 'belief' - arrived at by way of personal experience - is that audio replay equipment is best chosen, not on the basis of either technical measurement OR the subjective opinion of others, but by listening to it in one's own home. But of course it IS necessary to look , for example, at sensitivity and loading figures so as to avoid an obvious mismatch with existing items in the chain. Figures alone will never tell you how, say, an amp will work at home.
Rather than hold that either extreme in this argument is right or wrong, I would rather like to think that people really know how to best use their audio instruments to best advantage, be they electronic measuring devices or their ears. I would call that a pragmatic approach and - right or wrong - I think that JC takes a similar line.
'Tweeks' and cables are another matter as they are so dependent on the total context they are used in. That is my
stand.
I have been branded as a subjective! I do not generally get into argument on such matters as my 'belief' - arrived at by way of personal experience - is that audio replay equipment is best chosen, not on the basis of either technical measurement OR the subjective opinion of others, but by listening to it in one's own home. But of course it IS necessary to look , for example, at sensitivity and loading figures so as to avoid an obvious mismatch with existing items in the chain. Figures alone will never tell you how, say, an amp will work at home.
Rather than hold that either extreme in this argument is right or wrong, I would rather like to think that people really know how to best use their audio instruments to best advantage, be they electronic measuring devices or their ears. I would call that a pragmatic approach and - right or wrong - I think that JC takes a similar line.
'Tweeks' and cables are another matter as they are so dependent on the total context they are used in. That is my
stand.
Last edited:
You can't leave aside the Bybee though, that's like revisionist history and JC has repeatably championed not only the Bybee but Jack Bybee himself. Let's face it JC is in business with Jack Bybee. His name appears on that $5000 power strip Jack came out with. That is one reason why some people have called him a swindler.
Just because someone has a history of making good ( and not so good) designs behind them does not excuse them or give them a "get out of jail card" when they stick their foot in mouth and come out with an obvious snake oil product that they keep defending when there is zero evidence that it does what is claimed.
Failed and envious wannabe?
That's two hearty laughs I've had thanks to JC and yourself. Who wants to be known as someone who was in business with Jack Bybee 
ME! Yes, Jack Bybee is controversial, AND he is reckless in his advertizing. Still, he produces results, at least products that I and a number of others find do improve our audio systems. Everyone else, especially those of you who don't even have a highly refined audio system, should just ignore his products.
By the way, I am hoping to get the prototype of that Bybee-Curl 'strip' so I can try it for myself.
For the record, I live more than 1 hour driving distance from Jack Bybee. I have only visited him, perhaps 2-3 times in the last 15 years. He does come by about once in 3 months. Heck, I only got into his Bentley a couple of times. He usually comes, these days, in another car. So what do I get from this association? Well, free samples, for one. Shared interests, for another, like audio, cars, and TV programs. Yet, I am constantly attacked because I am not afraid to be his friend.
By the way, I am hoping to get the prototype of that Bybee-Curl 'strip' so I can try it for myself.
For the record, I live more than 1 hour driving distance from Jack Bybee. I have only visited him, perhaps 2-3 times in the last 15 years. He does come by about once in 3 months. Heck, I only got into his Bentley a couple of times. He usually comes, these days, in another car. So what do I get from this association? Well, free samples, for one. Shared interests, for another, like audio, cars, and TV programs. Yet, I am constantly attacked because I am not afraid to be his friend.
Didn't Feyerabend describe Richard Feynman (who had zero patience with philosophical navel-gazing but somehow managed to revolutionize modern physics) as an "uncivilized savage"?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.